Skip to main content

Full text of "Archbold's Pleading, Evidence, & Practice in Criminal Cases"

See other formats


Google 



This is a digital copy of a book that was preserved for general ions on library shelves before il was carefully scanned by Google as part of a project 

to make the world's books discoverable online. 

Il has survived long enough for the copyright to expire and the book to enter the public domain. A public domain book is one that was never subject 

to copyright or whose legal copyright term has expired. Whether a book is in the public domain may vary country to country. Public domain books 

are our gateways to the past, representing a wealth of history, culture and knowledge that's often diflicult to discover. 

Marks, notations and other marginalia present in the original volume will appear in this file - a reminder of this book's long journey from the 

publisher to a library and finally to you. 

Usage guidelines 

Google is proud to partner with libraries to digitize public domain materials and make them widely accessible. Public domain books belong to the 
public and we are merely their custodians. Nevertheless, this work is expensive, so in order to keep providing this resource, we have taken steps to 
prevent abuse by commercial parlies, including placing technical restrictions on automated querying. 
We also ask that you: 

+ Make non-commercial use of the plus We designed Google Book Search for use by individuals, and we request that you use these files for 
personal, non-commercial purposes. 

+ Refrain from automated querying Do not send automated queries of any sort to Google's system: If you are conducting research on machine 
translation, optical character recognition or other areas where access to a large amount of text is helpful, please contact us. We encourage the 
use of public domain materials for these purposes and may be able to help. 

+ Maintain attribution The Google "watermark" you see on each file is essential for informing people about this project and helping them find 
additional materials through Google Book Search. Please do not remove it. 

+ Keep it legal Whatever your use, remember that you are responsible for ensuring that what you are doing is legal. Do not assume that just 
because we believe a b<x>k is in the public domain for users in the United States, that the work is also in the public domain for users in other 

countries. Whether a book is still in copyright varies from country to country, and we can't offer guidance on whether any specific use of 
any specific book is allowed. Please do not assume that a book's appearance in Google Book Search means il can be used in any manner 
anywhere in the world. Copyright infringement liability can be quite severe. 

About Google Book Search 

Google's mission is to organize the world's information and to make it universally accessible and useful. Google Book Search helps readers 
discover the world's hooks while helping authors ami publishers reach new audiences. You can search through I lie lull text of this book on I lie web 
at |http : //books . qooqle . com/| 



AUCHBOLD'S 

PLEADING, EVIDENCE, AND PRACTIC1 



IN 



Criminal Cases. 



AXICHBOLD'S 

PLEADING, EVIDENCE, & PRACTICE 



Iff 



Criminal Cases* 



BY 

Sie JOHN JERVIS, 

LATE UOED CHIEF JUSTICE OF THE COURT OF COMMON FLEAS. 

WITH THE 

STATUTES, PRECEDENTS OF INDICTMENTS, &c. 



THE TWENTY-THIRD EDITION. 



V 



BT 



WILLIAM FEILDEN CRAIES, M.A. (Oxon.), 

OF THE INNER TEMFLE AND WESTERN CIRCUIT, 



AND 



GUY STEPHENSON, M.A. (Cantab.), 

OF THE INXEE TEMPLE AND SOUTH-EASTERN CIRCUIT, 
BARRT8TERS-AT*LAW. 



LONDON : 
SWEET AND MAXWELL, Limited, 

3, CHANCERY LANE. 

STEVENS AND SONS, Limited, 

119 and 120, CHANCERY LANE. 

1905. 



pristed by 

WILLIAM CLOWES AVD BOK8, UVtTRI> ( 
L09DOM AKD BBCCLBS. 






FORMER EDITIONS AND EDITORS 

OF THIS WORK. 



> 1st edition (1822) to 3rd edition (1828) by Arch bold. 

\ 4th edition (1831) to 9th edition (1843) by Jkrvis. 

I 10th edition (1846) to 15th edition (1862) by Wblsby. 

I 16th edition (1867) to 21st edition (1893) by Bruce. 

\ 22nd edition (1900) by the present editors. 

r 



"* tl*^ h 2 



PREFACE 

TO Tire TWENTY-THIRD EDITION. 



Sixce the publication of the 22nd Edition, in 1900, there has 
not been very much legislation affecting the Criminal Law. 
Indeed the only new statutes are the Money Lenders Act, 1900 
(63 Jt 64 Vict. e. 51), post, p. 594 ; the Larceny Act, 1901 ; the 
Poor Prisoners Defence Act, 1903; the Prevention of Cruelty 
to Children Act, 1904; and *. 28 of the Companies Act, 1900 
(63 <t 64 Viet. e. 48), post, p. 587, which deab with false state- 
ments by directors and officers of joint-stock companies. 

The Larceny Act, 1901 (1 Edw. 7, c. 10), which is printed at 
pp. 575, 576 of this Edition, has had the effect of removing the 
many difficulties found in working **• 75, 76 of the Larceny 
Ad, 1861, which it repeals — difficulties which had been pointed 
oat in In re BeUencontre [1891] 2 Q. B. 122. 

The Prevention of Cruelty to Children Ad, 1904 (4 Edw. 7, 
r. 15), which is in the main a re-enactment of the Act of 1894, 
will be found at p. 877, et seq. The chief changes effected by 
the new Act are the addition to the schedule of further enact- 
ments, to which the rules of the Act as to evidence and 
procedure are to be applied in the case of offences against 
children under sixteen ; the provision allowing conviction for 
cruelty on an indictment for manslaughter, and the alteration 
from three to six months of the time limit on prosecutions for 
offences against girls of thirteen and under sixteen against s. 5 
of the Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1885. In R. v. Chandra 
Dharma, 69 J. P. Rep. 39 (noted post, p. 918), a case was reserved 
on the question whether the prosecution for an offence against 
s. 5 of the Act of 1885, committed less than three months before 
October 1, 1904, when the Prevention of Cruelty to Children 
Act, 1904, came into force, was subject to the three months 1 
limitation in the Act of 1885, or to the six months' limitation 



viii Fre/ace to the Twenty-third Edition. 

in the Act of 1904. On March 18, 1905, the Court for Grown 
Cases Reserved decided (40 L. J. Newsp. 288 ; 21 T. L. R. 858) 
that the amendment effected by *. 27 of the Act of 1904 related 
to procedure only, and applied to offences committed before the 
section came into force, in respect of which the three months' 
limit imposed by the Act of 1885 had not expired on October 1, 
1904. 

The Poor Prisoners Defence Act, 1903 (3 Edw. 7, c. 38), will 
be found at p. 187, and the attorney-general's rules under it at 
p. 189 ; while the scales of costs for solicitor and counsel will be 
found at p. 255. Attention may here be drawn to the new 
scales of costs and allowances in criminal prosecutions made in 
June, 1904 (see pp. 249-255), superseding those of November, 
1903, which had superseded all prior scales. In view of these 
changes, the chapter on costs has been almost wholly rewritten. 

It has been thought more convenient to print the text of the 
Criminal Evidence Act, 1898, in full at p. 392, el seq., and to 
add as notes the various decisions interpreting its provisions. 
There are still some unsettled difficulties as to its effect, e.g. 
whether in cases where the husband or wife of a prisoner may 
be called for the Grown without the consent of the prisoner, 
such a witness is now compellable or is competent only. In 
R. v. Ellis, Lewes Assizes, November 25, 1899 (post, p. 398), on 
a charge of abduction under 48 & 49 Vict. c. 69, s. 7, Wills, J., 
ruled, in accordance with the practice adopted at the Central 
Criminal Court, that *. 4 of the Criminal Evidence Act, 1898, 
rendered the husband or wife compellable witnesses in prosecu- 
tions under the statutes scheduled to that Act. He had pro- 
posed to reserve a case ; but the prisoner was acquitted, and 
this difficulty still remains unsettled. So far as concerns cases 
within the Prevention of Cruelty to Children Act, 1904, or the 
first schedule to that Act, the difficulty is solved by s. 12 of 
that Act (post, p. 882), but it remains as to the other enact- 
ments referred to in s. 4 and the schedule to the Act of 1898 
(post, p. 397) ; and it is to be presumed that in s. 4 of the Act 
of 1898 calling such a witness " for the defence " without the 
consent of the accused means calling the witness on behalf of a 
co-defendant. 

The divergences of judicial opinion stated,/;0#/, pp. 319, 320, 
as to the scope and effect of the ruling in R. v. Lilly man, have 
been to a considerable extent removed by the judgment of 
the Court for Crown Cases Reserved in R. v. Osborne 



Preface to the Twenty-third Edition. ix 

[1905] I K. B. 551, which establishes that immediate com* 
pkinte are admissible in the case of offences against women 
and girls, even where the question of consent is not an 
essential element in the crime charged, and that such com- 
plaints are admissible even if made in answer to questions, 
provided that the questions are not leading, suggestive, or of 
an intimidating character. 

In the preface to the 22nd Edition it was stated that the 
title Treason had been revised in view of the probability that 
prosecutions for the offence might occur in the near future. 
Daring the South African War many prosecutions for treason 
took place in South Africa ; but the offence is there governed 
by the Roman-Dutch law, and not by the law of England. 
However, in this country the trial of R. v. Lynch [1903] 
1 K. B. 444, arising out of the same war, necessitated a careful 
examination of the English authorities on treason, and certain 
of the results of that investigation have been incorporated in 
the present Edition. 

The title Libel reflecting on the administration of justice 
has been rewritten, and that of Contempt of Court added {post, 
p. 1094), in consequence of the decisions in JR. v. TibbUs and 
Wmdust [1902] 1 K. B. 77 : R v. Gray [1900] 2 Q. B. 86 : 
and R. v. Parke [1903] 2 K. B. 432, in which last case the 
powers of the High Court to prevent comments on cases 
committed for trial were fully considered. The chapters on 
compensation (p. 263), restitution of property (p. 268), and 
compounding offences (p. 1089), have been revised and, it is 
hoped, improved. 

The title Bigamy (p. 1167) has been rearranged ; the various 
forms of " Disorderly Houses " have been dealt with more fully 
than in previous editions and forms of indictment have been 
inserted; the substance of the various statutes relating to 
Lotteries has been inserted ; and throughout the work the 
editors have made numerous alterations and additions ; $uj. 
as to the law relating to the taking of the deposition of a 
dying person (p. 374), and to the admissibility of dying 
declarations (p. 322), and as to proof of guilty knowledge in 
cases of receiving stolen property (p. 552) ; and they have 
inserted at p. 1327 certain of the new Prison Rules relating to 
the classification of prisoners by the prison authorities. Certain 
of the indictments have been modernized ; and the refer- 
ences have been rechecked throughout with the object of 



X Preface to the Twenty-third Edition. 

eliminating so far as possible all incorrect citations of cases 
and text-books, and the Index has been revised and supple- 
mented to meet numerous criticisms and suggestions received. 
The editors are obliged to Mr. B. 0. Bircham and Mr. H. E. 
Jenkins, both of the South - Eastern Circuit, for help in 
correction of references and of the Index, and to Mr. Arthur 
Denman, Clerk of Assize on the South-Eastern Circuit, and 
Mr. J. B. MatthewB, of the Oxford Circuit, for many valuable 
suggestions. 

In the Addenda and Corrigenda (pp. cxxix., cxxx.) will be 
found some cases decided too late to be included in the text, 
and correction of certain mistakes discovered while the edition 
was going through the press. 

W. F. C. 
G. S. 

Tcmplb, May 18ft, 1905. 



PREFACE 

TO THE FIKST EDITION (1822). 



In the year 1812, I collected all the authorities upon the 
Pleas of the Crown to be found in the text books, the books 
of reports, etc. ; all that could elucidate the subject in Bracton, 
Britton, Fleta, and the Mirror ; the substance of Hale, Haw- 
kins, the Third Institute, Dalton, Foster, and East ; all the 
cases upon the subject in the Year BookB, the old reports, and 
in the modern and recent reports ; and all the statutes upon the 
subject down to the period at which I made the collection. Of 
these materials I framed, with infinite pains, a Digest in three 
volumes, one of which was actually published in the year 1813. 

When I contemplated the publication above mentioned, 
woTks upon the Pleas of the Crown were extremely scarce ; 
those of repute, upon the subject, were rarely to be had, even 
at most extravagant prices. But immediately upon the publi- 
cation of my First Volume, two other works were announced 
upon the same subject, one of which was published very shortly 
after it was announced : the other not for nearly two years 
afterwards. Their being announced, however, had the effect 
of deterring me from proceeding with my Work ; I thought 
they would amply supply the deficiency of workB upon the 
subject ; and I felt too much diffidence in my own ability to 
enter into competition with the writers of them. Another, 
and a very elaborate work, (a) has since been added, which has 
fully confirmed me in my determination not to publish the 
work I originally contemplated. 

As the subject of Evidence in criminal cases, however, had 

(a) This is presumed to be Chitty's Criminal Law, a yalaable work, 
numerous refeienees to which have been inserted in the 23rd edition. 



xii Pre/ace to the First Edition. 

not been treated of by any of these writers, aud as some book 
upon the subject was extremely desirable, I thought I might 
select from the Work I originally compiled such part of it as 
related to evidence in criminal cases, and publish it, without 
subjecting myself to the imputation of wishing to enter into 
any competition with the learned writers of the Works already 
extant upon the Pleas of the Grown. I have made this com- 
pilation ; I have added to it all the cases since decided, and 
the statutes since enacted, upon the subject ; and I have com- 
pressed the whole into the smallest compass that appeared to 
me to be practicable, consistent- with perspicuity. I have also 
added precedents of indictments and other criminal pleadings 
— not from any idea that this part of the Work was required 
by the Profession, there being already one or two collections 
of great repute upon the subject — but merely because I found 
it impracticable to give the evidence in particular cases in the 
simplified form I was anxious to give it, without also giving, 
in each case, the particular indictment or pleading the evidence 
was intended to support. And as I was thus obliged to give 
the precedents, I thought it desirable, and indeed necessary, 
also to give such a summary of the law relative to pleading in 
criminal cases generally, as would enable the reader to frame 
an indictment in cases where he might not be able to find a 
precedent. 

As to the arrangement of my materials, I have endeavoured 
to make it simple and perspicuous. The work consists of two 
books— the First Book, which treats of Pleading and Evidence 
in criminal cases generally, is divided into two parts : the first, 
treating of Pleading generally, namely, of indictments, infor- 
mations, special pleas, demurrers, etc. ; the second, treating of 
Evidence generally, namely, of evidence of records, of matters 
quasi of record, of private written instruments, and of parol 
evidence, the competency and credit of witnesses, etc., etc 

The Second Book, which treats of Pleading and Evidence 
in particular cases, is divided into four parts : the first treats 
of offences against the property and persons of individuals ; 
the second treats of offences of a public nature, namely, offences 
against the King and his government, offences against public 
justice, offences against the public peace, offences against public 
trade, and offences against public police and economy; the 



Preface to the First Edition. xiii 

third treats of conspiracies ; and the fourth of principals and 
accessories. 

I have now apprised the reader of what he is to expect m 
the following Work. Trifling as it may appear, it has cost me 
mnch time and great labour. I have taken infinite pains to 
simplify my subject ; to reject everything redundant or irre- 
levant ; to compress the whole into the smallest possible com- 
pass consistent with perspicuity ; and to clothe it in language 
plain, simple, and unadorned. In fact, my sole object has 
been to make this a practically useful book : I neither antici- 
pate nor desire for it a higher commendation. 

J. P. A. 

Symoxw Iks. 



TABLE OF CONTENTS 



+mm 



BOOK I. 
Pleading, Practice, and Evidence generally. 

PART I. 

Pleading and Practice generally. 
Ch. I. Indictment. 

Sect. 1. What, and in what cases it lies . , i 

2. Against whom it lies , n 

8. Form of it • . f , t t # .35 

4. Joinder of two or more Defendants in one Indict- 

ment •••§••.., 86 

5. Joinder of several Offences in different Counts in 

one Indictment ••.,... 88 

6. Caption 98 

7. Within what Time the Bill must be preferred . 94 

8. How found • • . . , on 

9. Process on . . \ \ \ \ 108 

10. Bail on 110 

11. In what Cases quashed 120 

12. When and where tried 123 

18. Certiorari. . .• 12g 

14. Nolle prosequi : ! 189 

11/ Information \ ' j^o 

. Sect. 1. Preliminary • i ..... ." 142 

2. Ex officio •...,. ] .' U2 

8. By the Master of the Crown Office . .144 

HL Coroner's Inquisition » 1 . . . . ] | 153 

IV. Pleas, Replications, etc. ••..!!! 161 

Sect. 1. Order and Time of Pleading .'.'.'.] 161 

2. Plea to the Jurisdiction ...!.. 162 

3. Plea in Abatement . 168 

4. Demurrer ig^ 

6. Special Pleas in Bar \ \ \ m 

1. Autrefois Acquit ] 169 

2. Autrefois Convict 1 74 

8. Autrefois Attaint .... !| 177 

4. Pardon .... 17fl 

6. Genersliggue ! ! ! 179 



XVI 



Contents. 



PAOB 

Ch. V. Trial, Judgment, and Punishment 181 

Sect. 1. Arraignment • , 181 

2. Summoning, impanelling, swearing, and charging 

the Jury ,191 

8. Proceedings at Trial 907 

4. Verdict 214 

5. Proceedings between Verdict and Judgment • . 225 

6. Judgment and Punishments ..... 229 
VI. Costs and Rewards ........ 246 

Sect. 1. Costs payable out of Public Funds .... 246 

2. Costs payable by the Prosecutor .... 269 

3. Costs payable by the Defendant .... 259 

4. Rewards 261 

VII. Compensation and Restitution of Property . . 268 

Sect 1. Compensation 268 

2. Restitution of Property 265 

VIII. Criminal Appeal 271 

Sect. 1. Crown Cases Reserved 271 

2. Writ of Error 278 

8. Bill of Exceptions 290 

4. New Trial * 291 

5. Venire de novo ........ 294 



PART II. 

Evidence generally. 

Ch. I. What Allegations must be proved . 

II. The Manner of proving the Matters put iu issue 
Sect. 1. Preliminary Matters . t 
2. Admissions and Confessions 
8. Presumptions • • , 

4. Written Evidence . . 

1. Publio Documents . 

2. Private Documents • 

5. Parol Evidence , • 

1. In what Cases receivable 

2. Competency of Witnesses 
8. Privilege , . . 

4. Credit of Witnesses • , , 

5. The Number of Witnesses requisite 

6. Process against Witnesses 

7. Witnesses' Expenses • 

8. Examination of Witnesses 



296 
815 
815 
825 
889 
844 
844 
880 
885 
885 
887 
897 
408 
408 
410 
414 
414 



. Content*. 



xvn 



BOOK II. 
• • • • • 
Pleadiny, Practice f and Evidence in particular Oases. 



PART I. 



Offences against Individuals. 



PAGE 



Ch. I. Offences against the Property of Individuals . , . 426 

Sect. 1. Larceny ••#...... 426 

• Larceny by Clerks or Servants .... 464 
Larceny by Persons employed in the Publio 

Service, or by Police Constables . . 467 

Stealing, etc., Horses, Cows, Sheep, etc. . . 468 
Stealing Dogs and other Domestic Animals not 

the subject of Larceny at Common Law . . 470 

Hunting or stealing Deer • . • • . 473 

• Taking or killing Hares or Babbits in Warrens 

by Night .476 

Taking or destroying Fish 477 

Stealing, or dredging for, Oysters . .479 

Stealing, or severing with intent to steal, Ore, 

etc., from a Mine ••«... 482 

Stealing or outting Trees, etc 488 

Stealing, etc., Plants, etc., growing in Gardens . 488 

• Stealing, etc., Plants, etc., not growing in Gardens 490 

• Stealing, etc., Lead, Metal, or Fixtures , , 491 
Stealing, etc., Records, etc. . . . . , 498 

Stealing, etc, Wills, etc , 495 

Stealing Documents of Title to Real Estate . 497 
Concealment of Instrument of Title or Falsifica- 
tion of Pedigree by Vendor or Mortgagor, or 

his Solicitor or Agent 498 

• Stealing Valuable Securities , 500 

Stealing, etc., Letters, etc 502 

Stealing from a Wreck . • . . , 515 

Larceny by Tenants or Lodgers . . . . 516 

Stealing Silk, etc., in the process of Manufacture 517 

Stealing from Vessels in Docks or from Docks etc. 518 

Bobbery, etc. , 520 

Piracy jure gentium 589 

Piracy by Statute 542 

Receiving Stolen Property 546 

Rftoeiving Stolen Letters, etc 555 

2. Embezzlement- , # • . . 556 

By Clerks or Servants 556 

By Persons •employed, in the Public Service, or 

by Police Constables 574 



XTiii Content?. 

Ch. I. Offences against the Property of Individuals— continued. tage 
Sect. 2. Embezzlement — continued. 

By Fraudulent Conversion of Property by Persons 

intrusted •«••.... 575 

By Trustees 588 

By Directors, Offioers, and Members of Publio 

Companies • 585 

8. Falsification of Accounts by Clerks, etc. . . 590 

4. False Pretences and Cheating 598 

5. Burglary, Housebreaking, Sacrilege, Stealing in 

Dwelling-houses, etc 620 

6. Arson 647 

Setting Fire or attempting to set Fire to Houses 

and other Buildings, etc. «... 647 

Setting Fire to Mines 657 

Setting Fire to or destroying Ships, eto. . 658 

Setting Fire to Crops, Staoks, etc. 661 

7. Malicious Damage 664 

Endangering Life or Property by use of Ex- 
plosives ........ 664 

Riotously demolishing Houses, etc. . . 670 

Injuries to Houses, etc, by Tenants . . 672 
Destroying Goods in process of Manufacture, and 

Machinery 672 

Destroying Machines used in Agriculture or 

oertain Manufactures 675 

Drowning Mines, eto 676 

Destroying Engines, Emotions, eto. , used in Mines 678 

Destroying Ships, with intent, eto. . • . 679 

Damaging Ships, with intent, etc. • . . 680 

Exhibiting False Signals, etc 681 

Destroying parts of Ships in Distress, etc. . . 662 

Cutting away, etc., Buoys, eto 688 

Destroying Sea and Biver Banks, etc. • • 688 

Destroying or removing Piles, etc, in Rivers, eto. 665 

Destroying Bridges, Viaducts, and Aqueducts • 686 

Destroying Toll-bars, eto , 687 

Injuries to Railway Trains and Telegraphs . 688 

Destroying Dams of fish-ponds, etc. . . 690 

Killing or Maiming Animals .... 692 

Destroying Hopbinds 694 

Destroying Trees, eto 695,696 

Destroying Plants, etc., and Fences . • 696 
Destroying or damaging Works of Art, eto., in 

Museums, eto 700 

Malicious Injuries to Property to amount of 51. • 700 

Attempted Injuries to Post Offioe Letter Boxes . 702 

8. Forgery . 702 

At Common Law 702 

By Statute 705 

General Provisions 705 

Counterfeiting Seals of State .721 



Content*. 



xix 



Ch. I. Offences against the Property of Individuals— amftnt^. page 
Sect. 8. Forgery — continued. 

. Forging, etc., Treasury Bills, etc. . 722 

Forging, etc., Bank Notes ..... 728 

Forging, etc, Wills 725 

Forging, etc., Deeds, Bonds, etc. . 726 
Forging, etc., Bills of Exchange and Promissory 

Notes 727 

Forging, etc., Orders, Receipts, etc., for Money, 

Goods, etc 731 

Forging, etc, Transfers of Stock, Powers of At- 
torney, Attestations thereto, etc. . . . 741 
Making False Entries of Stock, etc. ... 745 
Clerks to the Bank, etc., making out False 

Dividend Warrants 747 

Forging, etc., Stock Certificates or Coupons . 748 

Forging, etc., Debentures 749 

Forging, etc., Share Warrants .... 749 
Purchasing or Receiving, etc., Forged Bank 

Notes, etc 749 

Forging, etc., Marriage Lioences . . . 751 
Forging, etc., Registers of Births, etc., etc. . 751 
Forgery under other Statutes — 
As to Records, Judicial Proceedings, Proclama- 
tions, etc 75G 

Public Documents and Proceedings of 

Corporations and Companies . . 758 

Public Revenue 758 

Stamps • 759 

Public Offices 760 

Navy and Army 761 

Public Trade 761 

Parliamentary, etc., Elections . . 768 

Telegrams 764 

Possession of Appliances for Forging . 764 
Frauds against the Declaration of Title Act, 

1862 766 

Frauds against the Transfer of Land Act, 1862 . 766 
Frauds against the Land Transfer Acts, 1875 and 

1897/ 766 

9. False Personation 767 

Personating Seamen, Soldiers, etc. . . 766 

Personating Owners of Stock, etc. . 770 

Personation to obtain Property .... 772 

Personating Bail, etc. 772 

Personating Voters 773 

U. Offences against the Person 774 

Sect. 1. Homicide 774 

Murder and Manslaughter 774 

Conspiracy to Murder and inciting to Murder . 818 

* Attempts to Murder 814 



xx Contents. 

Ch. II. Offences against the Persons of Individuals— continued. pack 

Sect. 2. Concealment of Birth 823 

3. Attempts to procure Abortion , , • 826 

4. Assault, Battery, Wounding, etc. . • • • 830 

Assault 830 

Shooting, Wounding, etc., with intent to maim, 
etc . 839 

Attempting to choke, suffocate, or strangle, etc., 
with intent, etc 845 

Administering, etc., Chloroform, etc., with intent 
to commit Indictable Offences . • . 846 

Administering, etc, Poison, etc., with intent to 
endanger Life, or to injure, etc. • . . 847 

Injuring or attempting to injure Persons by 
Explosive or Corrosive Substances, etc. . . 849 

Causing Explosions likely to endanger Life . 852 
. Setting Spring Guns, etc., with intent, etc. . 852 

Attempting to endanger the Safety of Railway 
Passengers 853 

Injuries arising from the Furious Driving of 
Carriages 855 

Obstructing, etc., Ministers of Religion, etc., in 
discharge of their Duties .... 856 

Assaults on Officers, etc, saving Wreck . 857 

Impeding Persons endeavouring to escape from 
Wrecks 858 

Forcing Seamen on Shore, etc 858 

Assaults iwith intent to commit Felony, or 
on Peace Officers, Officers of Workhouses, 
etc 861 

Assaults by Poachers on Gamekeepers . . 865 

Shooting at Officers of the Customs, or King's 
Ships 867 

Assaulting, neglecting, etc, Apprentices or Ser- 
vants ........ 870 

Ill-treatment of Lunatics in Asylums . . . 873 

Abandoning or exposing Children under Two 
Years of Age whereby Life is endangered . 874 

Actual bodily harm to Child engaged in Dan- 
gerous Performance ...... 876 

Assault, Ill-treatment, Neglect,! Abandonment, 
etc, of Children under Sixteen by Persons 
over Sixteen 877 

5. False Imprisonment 891 

6. Abduction 896 

Of a Woman on account of her Fortune, etc. . 897 

Of a Girl under Sixteen Years of Age . • . 899 
Of a Girl under Eighteen Years of Age, with 

intent that she should be carnally known , 902 
Stealing Children under the age of Fourteen 

Years 903 



Contents. 

Ch. IL Offences against the Persons of Individuals— continued. taor 

Sect. 7. Rape, etc 905 

Ravishing Women 905 

Carnal Knowledge of Girls under Thirteen and 

from Thirteen to Sixteen Years of Age. • 912 

Indecent Assault, etc 918 

Proouratien of Women and Girls • 920 

6. Sodomy and Bestiality 928 

Assault with intent to commit Sodomy, etc., 

and Gross Indecency between Males . . 925 



PART n. 
Offences of a Public Nature, 

* 

Ch. I. Offences against the Grown and Government . 928 

Sect. 1. High Treason ........ 928 

2. Treason Felony ....... 948 

3: Attempts to injure or alarm the Sovereign . 951 

4. Offences against the Foreign Enlistment Act 953 

5. Coinage Offences • . . , • . 959 

General Provisions 959 

Counterfeiting Coin 963 

Colouring, etc., Coin of the Realm • . 965 

Impairing, etc, .British Gold and Silver Coin . 967 

Defacing British Coin . ..... 968 

Buying or Celling, etc., Counterfeit British Coin 
at a Lovter Value • . . . . .969 

Importing .or exporting Counterfeit Coin . 971 

Uttering Counterfeit Coin 972 

Possession of Counterfeit Coin .... 978 
Making, etc., Coining Tools ..980 
Conveying. Coining Tools or Coins out of the 

Mint 985 

Making, etc., Medals resembling Current Coin . 985 

6. Sedition (including Seditious Libel) ... 986 

7. Unlawful Oaths ....... 999 

Oaths to commit Treason or Felony . . 1002 

8. Inciting to Mutiny 1004 

9. Illegal Training and Drilling 1006 

10. Offences relating to Public Stores .... 1008 

11. Disclosure of Government Secrets .... 1011 

12. Misconduct by Executive and Administrative 

Officials of the Crown 1014 

13. Treasure Trove 1015 

14. Smuggling 1015 

II. .Offences against Religion and Publio Worship . 1019 

Sect. 1. Blasphemy and Blasphemous Libel . 1019 

2. Disturbing Public Worship 1023 



xxii Contents. 

VXQS 

Ch. III. Offences against Publio Justice 1028 

Sect. 1. Escape 1028 

2. Breach of Prison 1086 

8. Rescue 1068 

4. Being at Large daring ta sentence of Penal Servi- 

tude . ." 1040 

5. Perjury and Cognate Offences . ♦ 1043 

6. Administering, etc., Voluntary Oaths, etc. . . 1076 

7. Embracery 1077 

8. Interference with Witnesses 1078 

9. Barratry, Champerty, and Maintenance • 1079 

10. Bribery of Publio Officials 1080 

11. Extortion by Public Officials 1083 

12. Misconduct of Officers of Justice .... 14365 

13. Disobeying the Orders of Justices .... 1087 

14. Compounding Offences • 1068 

15. Libels reflecting on the Administration of Justice, 

and Contempt of Court ..... 1094 

IV. Offences against the Publio Peace 1098 

ect. 1. Unlawful Assembly 1096 

2. Bout 1100 

8. Biot 1101 

4. Affray 1107 

5. Forcible Entry and Detainer 1108 

6. Pound-breach and Rescue of Distress • . 1114 

7. Challenge to Fight 1114 

8. Letters threatening to Murder or to injure Pro- 

perty 1116 

9. Defamatory Libel 1118 

V. Offences against Public Trade 1185 

Sect. 1. Offences against Bankruptcy Law , . . 1185 

2. Counterfeiting Trade Marks, etc 1151 

3. Offences arising out of relation between Employers 

and Workmen ....... 1158 

, r 4. Offences as to the sale of Food and Drugs , 1163 

VI. Offences against Publio Morals and Police • . 1167 

Sect. 1. Bigamy 1167 

2. Common Nuisanoe ....... 1180 

(a) Nuisances to Public Comfort, Enjoyment, 

or Health 1181 

(o) Acts injurious to Public Safety . . . 1186 

(c) Aots injurious to Publio Decency, Morals, or 

Order. ....... 1188 

Open and Notorious Lewdness . . 1188 

Obscene Libels, Exhibitions, etc. • • 1190 
Disorderly • Houses, Bawdy-houses, 

Gaming-houses, (and Betting-houses 1194 

Lotteries 1205 

Unlicensed Suburban Racecourses . 1207 

(d) Offences as to Corpses 1207 



Contents. xxiii 

Ch. VL Offences against Publio Morals and Police— continued. paos 
Seek 2. Common Nuisance — continued. 

(e) Interference with Publio Rights of Passage . 1210 

Nnisanoe to Highways • . • 1210 

Obstruction 1215 

Non-repair 1220 

Non-Repair of Bridges .... 1285 
8. Inoiting Infants to Betting or Wagering, or to 

borrowing Money • 1242 

4. Poaching 1244 

5. Refusing to exeoute a Publio Offioe . . . 1250 

6. Sending nnseaworthy Ship to Sea .... 1252 

7. Cruelty to Animals 1258 

8. Sending Postal Packets enclosing Deleterious 

Matter, etc 1254 

9. Corrupt Practices and other Indictable Offences at 

Parliamentary Elections . . . . . 1254 

10. Corrupt Practices and other Indictable Offences at 

Municipal and certain other Elections • . 1266 

11. Bribery and Corruption by Members and Servants 

of Public Bodies 1272 

PART III. 

Conspiracy, attempt, and incitement, to commit Crime . 1276 

Sect. 1. Conspiracy ......... 1276 

2. Soliciting or inoiting to commit a Crime . 1298 

8. Attempting to commit Crime 1295 

PART IV. 

Accessories, Abettors, etc 1297 

Principals in the Second Degree 1297 

Accessories before the Fact 1800 

Accessories after the Fact 1805 

Misprision of Treason or Felony 1806 

Abettors in Misdemeanor 1809 

PART V. 

Offences committed after Previous Convictions .... 1811 

Offences by Habitual Drunkards 1820 

APPENDIX. 

Classification of Prisoners 1827 

1. Convict Prisons 1827 

2. Local Prisons 1880 

INDEX 1841 



TABLE OF STATUTES. 



[This table does not include repealed statutes mentioned in the text,] 
[Tie heaey type indicate* the page on which the full text of an enactment is printed.] 



PACE 



Jncert. temp, 
StaMum de Conspiratoribus 1080 

1275. 

3 Edw. 1 (Stat. West. Prim.)— 

c 25 (Champerty) 1080 

c 26 (Extortion)... 1061, 1068 

1386. 

13 Edw. 1 (Circumspect* agatis) ._ 1013 

(Stat. West. Sec.) c 31... 290 

c 34 (Abduction)...... 459, 896 

c 35 (Abduction) 897 

c. 49 (Champerty) 1080 

1396. 

23 Edw. 1 (Stat, defrang. pris.: 1 
Edw. 2, st. 2, e. 1, 
Rufhead) 1036 

1287. 

2* Edw. 1 (Magna Charto), c. 14... 240 

1800. 

28 Edw. 1, c 11 (Champerty) 1080 

1806. 

33 Edw. 1, e. 4 (Ordinacio de /»- 

quisitionibas) ... 199 

(Ordinacio de Cfoit- 

spiratoribus) ... 1080, 

1276 
2 Edw. 3 (Slat. Northampton), c. 8 1107 

1881. 

5 Edw. 3, c 11 (Capias) ...103, 108 

1851. 

» Edw. 3, it 5, c. 2 {Treason) 2, 88, 928 
c.8 (Juries) 204 

1867. 
31 Edw. 3, it. 1, c 14 (Escape) 1029 



1880. 

PACK 

34 Edw. 3, c. 1 (Justices) 108, 1079, 1102 

1881. 

5 Ric 2, st. 1, c. 7 (e. 8, Rufhead: 

Forcible Entry) UOO, 1106 

1888. 

13 Ric. 2, 8t. 1, c. 5 (Admiralty) ... 540 

1881. 

15 Ric. 2, c. 2 ( Forcible Entry) 1102, 1106 
c. 3 (Admiralty) 540 

1884. 

17 Ric. 2, c. 8 (Riot, etc.) 1100, 1108 

1411. 

13 H. 4, c. 7 (Riot) 1100 

1418. 

1 H. 5, c. 5 (Additions) 56 

1414. 

2 H. 5, st. 1, c. 8 (Riot) 1099, 1100 

1429. 

8 H. 6, c. 9 (Forcible Entry) 1108 

1485. 

14 H. 6, c. I (Judgment) 230 

1441. 

20 H. 6, c. 9 (Trial of Peeresses) ... 182 

1487. 

3 H. 7, c. 3 (Calendar) 125 



xxvi Table of 

1494. 

PAGE 

10 H. 7, c. 22, Ir. (Poyning % s Act) 929,943 

1495. 

U H. 7, c. 1 (Treason) 929, 947 

c 12 (Pauper) 190 

1511. 

3 H. 3, c. 11 (Physicians) 1252» 

1518. 

5 H. 8, c. 6 (Physicians) 1252m 

c. 16 (Surgeons) I252n 

1514. 

6 H. 8, c. 6 (Certiorari) 138 

1580. 

22 H. 8, c. 5 (Bridges), s. 1 1236 

88.2,3,4,5,7 1887 

1581. 

23 II. 8, c. 13 (Borough Jurors) ... 192 

1586. 

28 H. 8, c. 15 (Offences at Sea) 38, 39, 539, 

541,929 
1540. 

32 H. 8, c. 9 (Subornation, etc,), 

B. 3 1043, 1051, 1077 

c. 40 (Physicians) 1252» 

c. 42 (Surgeon*) 1252m 

1541. 

33 H. 8, c. 9 (Gaming) 1198 

c. 12 (Offence* in Palaces) 795 

c.39(OwHZ>f6f#),B8.40,42 117 

1548 t 

35 H. 8, c. 2 (Treason Abroad)... $7, 139, 

888 
1547. 

1 Edw. 6, c. 1 (Sacrament), si. 1-4 1019 

c. 7 (Judge of Assize) 228, 230 

- c. 12 (Stolen Horses), s. 10 217 

1548. 

2 4 3 Edw. 6, c. 1 (Uniformity) ... 846 

1551. 

5 <fc 6 Edw. 6, c. 1 (Uniformity), 8. 4 346 

c. A (Brawling) 1025 

c. 11 (Treason 

Abroad), s. 4 1025 

c. 16 (Sale of Public 

Offices) 1015, 1081 

1554. 

1 Mary, seas. 1, c. 1 (Treason) 931 

f©38. 2, c. 3 (Sacrament) 1019, 1023 



Statutes. 



1555. 



1 <fc 2 Ph. & M. c, 10 (Treason), as. 

6, 8 



1556. 

2 <fc 3 Ph. <fc M. c. 7 (Stolen Horse*) 

1558. 

1 Elk. c. 1 (Public Worship) 410, 

c. 2 (Uniformity) 

i. 3 1019, 1 

1562. 

5 Eliz. c. 9 (Perjury) 1043, 1 

1571. 

13 Eliz. c. 5 (Fraudulent Convey- 
ances), bb. 1, 2 11J 

1575. 

18 Eliz. c. 5 (Information) 142, 10 

s. 4 10 

5 47, 10! 

1588. 

81 Eliz. c. 5 (Information) 142, 106 

fb. 4, 5 47, 109 

c. 11 (Forcible Entry) 1101 

- 8. 12 (Stolen Horses) 26 

1601. 

43 Eliz. c. 2 (Poor Lair) 125 

1688. 

21 Jac. 1, c. 8 (Certiorari), s. 4 184, 1101 

c. 15 (Forcible Entry) ...llOfi 

1661. 

13 Car. 2, at. 1, c. 1 (Treasonable 

Practices)... 986 

c. 5 (Tumultuous 

Petitioning) 1100 



1688. 

14 Car. 2, c. 4 (Uniformity) 
i. 20 



m 

1019 



1677. 

29 Car. 2, c. 7 (Sunday), i. 6... 810, 893 

1679. 

81 Car. 2 (Habeas Corpus)...\lQ, HI, 115 

B. 4 116 

6 128, 124 

11 891 

1688. 

1W.4M, c. 18 (Toleration), s. 15 1028 



c. 21 (Clerk of Peace), fl. 8 1015 
.2,c.2(Mo/%Afo)UJ, 



MBS 



240, 988 



Tbfo of Staitdes. 



xxvii 



1680. 

PXGB 

2 W . A M. c. 5 {Distress for Sent), b. 8 1059 

1688. 

4W.AU.cAS (Information), ss. 1, 5 145 

c S4 (£rfr«rt#), B. 4 117 

1684. 

6 A 7 W. 3 f.ljxriteaW*) 1252* 

1685. 

7A8W.3(7*r*a*»,)— 

*. I 187, 881 

2 200, 326, 408, 881 

8 982 

4 408, 868 

». 5, 6 95,868 

8-7 198, 868 

8 806, 868 

9 868 

■ — 10 182,988 

II 988 

1687. 

9*.Z,c*3b (Blasphemy: 9A10W, 

8, c. 32, Ruffhead)— 

s. 1 96, 237, 410, 1018 

2 1080 

1686. 

10 W. 3. c. 12 {Fees of Court : c. 23 

Ruf&ad), ss.7, 8 86,1083 

1688. 

11 W. 3, c 7 {Piracy), g. 7 648 

w. 8, 9 39, 648 

s. 10 39, 648 

<?. 12 (Cffences by Official* 

Abroad: 11 * 12 
W. 8, Rujkead) 88, 125 
143, 1015 

1700. 

1*A13W.3,C. 2(.4<* of Settlement) 938 
b. 8 400 

1708. 

1 Aw, c. 2 {Bridge* : 1 Anne, at. 1, 
c. 18, Ruff head) — 
— *f.4,5»8 1868 

•• V m*. .••*.. ••.«.•••#*. SJE3BB 

ft 2, c 9, s. 8 {Evidence for 

Defence) 209, 1051 

st 2, c. 21, s. 3 {Treason) 983 

1707. 

6 Anne, c. 1 1 (Succession to Crown) 938 

c.41 (Treason), b. 1 938 

b. 2 986 

1706. 

7 Anne, c 12 (Diplomatic Privilege) 21 

e. 21 (Treason), i. 14 ...96, 198, 

868 



1714. 



PAGE 

1 G. 1, st 2, c. 5 (Riot) 818 

m.1,2 1104 

s. 8 894 

5 1106 

8 95, 1105 

1717. 

4 G. 1, c. 11 (Piracy), 8. 7 548 

1721. 

8 G. 1, c 2 (Lottery) 1205 

c. 24 (Piracy), 88. 1, 8 39, 548 

1788. 

9 G. 1, c. 19 (Lottery), 8. 4 1805 

1785. 

12 G. 1, c. 29 (Barratry, etc.), 8. 4 1051, 

1079 
1788. 

2 G. 2, c. 21 (Murder) 88 

c. 25 (Perjury, etc.), s. 2 ... 233 

1051, 1059 
1781. 

5 G. 2, c. 19 (Quarter Session r), 

88. 2, 8 134 

1788. 

6 G. 2, c. 85 (Lottery), b. 29 1206 

1785. 
9 G. 2, c. 5 (Witchcraft), i. 4 593 

1787. 

11 G. 2, c. 19 (Rescue of Distrcn), ^ 10 1 114 

1748. 

16 G. 2, c. 31 (Prison, Escape)— 

8.1 1088 

88.2,8 1080 

8.4 1081 

1744. 

18 G. 2, c. 15 (Su-tpeons) 1252m 

c. 80 (Piracy), 88. 1, 2, 8 

39, 170, 544 
1745. 

19 G. 2, c. 21 {Swearing), b. 12 95 

1747. 

20 G. 2, c. 30 (Treason) 933 

1751. 

24 G. 2, c. 28 (Calendar) 298 

1758. 

26 G. 2, e. 86 (Disorderly Houses)— 

8.2 1184 

88. 3-6 1195 

8.8 1185 

10 131, 1185 

C. 87 (Murder), a. 9 1066 



xxviii Table of 

1770. 

I' AGE 

10 G. 3, c. 47 {India), 8. 7 125 

1772. 

12 6. 3, c. 24 (Dockyards, etc., Pro- 

tection), s. 2 38,233,668 

c. 30 (Piracy) 644 

1773. 

13 G. 3, c. 63 (India), s. 39 38, 125, 371 

ss.40,44 411 

1774. 

14 G. 3, c. 78 (Accidental Fire*), s. 86 655 

1781. 

21 G. 8, c. 70 (India), 8. 7 125 

1784. 

24 G. 3, sets. 2, c 25 (India) 377 

1786. 

26 G. 3, s. 57 (India)... 377, 882 

1790. 

30 G. 3, c. 48 (Treason), s. 1 888 

1791. 

31 G. 3. c. 32 (Roman Catholic*) ... 655 

s. 7 1251n 

1792. 

32 G. 3, c. 60 (Libel)— 

8.1 215,1118 

2 214,1118 

3 215,1118 

4 1118 

1798. 

83 G. 3, c. 52 (India), s. 62 1081 

1795. 

36 G. 3, c. 7 (Treason), s. 1 44, 88, 988 

88. 2, 6 934 

1797. 

37 G. 3, C. 70 (Incitement to Mutiny)— 
8. 1 69, 79, 1004 

2 50, 170, 1004 

3 1004 

c. 123 (Unlawful Oaihs)— 

-- 8. 1 • 999 

2 999 

3 999 

88.4,5 1000 

b. 6 51, 1000 

7 170, 1000 

179a 

38 G. 8, c. 52 (Counties of Cities)— 

88. 2, 8 44 

8.8 268 

10 44,46 

11 194 



Statutes. 

1799. 

rAGE 

39 G. 3, c. 37 (Offences at Sea) ... 83, 53S 

c. 79 (Unlawful Societies) 100C 

1800. 

89 & 40 G. 3, c. 93 (Treason) ... 200, 409, 

984 

c. 94 (Criminal 

Lunatics), s. 2 

188, 220, 221 

1801. 

41 G. 8, c. 90 (Crown Debts), b. 8 ... 363 

8. 9 ... 346 

c. 109 (Inclosures), 8. 9 1223 

1802. 

42 G. 8, c. 85 (Offences by Officials 

Abroad)... 125, 148, 377, 
411, 1013, 1015 

8. 1 38 

5 1044 

c. 119 (Lottery), 8. 2 1206 

1808. 

43 G. 3, u. 59 {Bridges), 88. 5, 7 ...1288 

1806. 

45 G. 3, C. 92 (Writ of Subpoena), 

88. 3, 1 411,413 

1808. 

48 G. 3, c. 48 (Bail Bonds), 8. 1 ... 109 

C. 75 (Burial of Drowned 

Persons) 735 

1809. 

49 G. 3, C. 126 (Sale of Public 

Offices) 1015,1081 

1810. 

50 G. 3, c. 102 {Unlawful Oaths, I.) 1000 

1811. 

51 G. 3, c. 100 (Counties of Cities)— 

s. 1 44 

2 258 

1812. 

52 G. 3, c. 38 (Militia), 8. 197 1251» 

c. 104 (Unlawful Oaths)— 

s. 1 1002 

83. 2, 4, 5 1008 

b. 6 1003 

7 61,1008 

8 170,1003 

c. 148 (Land Tax), 8. 6 ... 761 

c. 146 (Births, etc.. Registers) 868 

c 156 (Religious Worship) 665 

s. 9 1«51» 

12 1038 

C. 166 (Prisoners of War 

Escape), 88. 1, 2...1081 

8, 4... 1081 



Table of Statutes. 



1813. 

rAGi 

53G. 3, e.89(£/€Ci«m«), 8. 6 125 

c. 127 (Ecclesiastical Court s) 74 

1814. 

54 G. 3, c 146 (Trtamn), 8. 1 084 

s. 2 886 

1815. 

55 G. 3, c. 50 (Gaol Fees Abolition) — 

w.4,5 228 

s. 9 228. 1068 

13 1068 

14 228 

c. 137 {Poor Relief), b. 1... 63 

8. 2 556 

1816. 

56 G. 3, a 87 (Grand Jury, I.) 98, 99 

c 138 (Pillory Abolition), 

8. 2 238 

1817. 

57 G. 3, c. 6 (Treason), s. 1 44, 886 

— ■ ». 4 886 

ee.5,6 935 

c 19 (Seditious Meetings) 564 

8. 25 1000, 1100 

c. xxix. (Michael Angela 

Taylor's Act) ... 1218 

1818. 

58 G. 3, c 70 (Disorderly Houses) 1195 

1818. 

59 G. 3, c 12 (Poor Relief), s. 7 ... 562 

1820. 

60 G. S £ 1 G. 4, c 1 (Unlawful 

Drilling) — 

88.1,2 1006 

b. 4 1006 

7 95, 1006 

c. 4 (Pleading in 

Misdemeanor) — 

88.1,2 162 

8.4 129,182 

88.8,9 ...144,182 

8.10 162,182 

c. 8 (Criminal 

Libel), a. 1 886 

■ 88. 2, 4, 7 ... oOf 

1 G. 4, c 57 ( Whipping) 239 

c 90 (Ofences at Sea), 8. 1 539 

1821. 

1 * 2 G. 4, e. 41 (Steam Engine 

Furnaces), 8. 1- 1181 

sb.2,3 1182 

c 88 (Rescue), *. 1 1088 



PAGE 



3 G. 4, c. 46 (I**y of Fine*)...... 117, 119 

. c. 114 (Hard Labour) 287 

e. 126 (Turnpike Roads), 

8. 110 1210 



1828. 

4 G. 4, c. 37 (Levy of Hues) 

c. 48 (Judgment of Death)22S, 



119 

288 

1206 



c. 60 (Lottery), s. 41 

C. 76 (Marrtage) — 

8.14 1044,1072,1175 

2L 96 

22 1175 

26 1171 

81 1172 



1824. 

5 G. 4, c. 83 (Vagrancy)— 

8. 4 247, 1189, 1191 

6 895 

10 289 

12 , 246 

c. 84 (Transportation) 233 

». 22 47, 1040 

23 1040 

24 361, 1041 

c. 118 (Siape Trade) 89 

8.9 545 

10 763 

1826. 

6 G. 4, c. 42 (Bank) 432 

c. 50 (Juries) — 

8. 1 101, 182, 204 

89. 8, 9 194 

s. 10 194, 195 

12 194, 195, 201 

13 202 

20 794,195,' 199, 204, 206 

21 886 

88. 22, 25 194 

B. 27 204 

29 199, 200 

30 196 

34 197 

89. 50, 52 192 

8. 61 1077 

62 933 

c. 66 (Trial of Peers, S.) ... 182 

c. 92 (Marrtage) 1170 

1826. 

7 G. 4, c. 16 (Chelsea Hospital)— 

8.84 556 

86 66, 556 

88 761,768 

c. 46 (Country Bankers) 432, 719 

8. 7 856 

9 62, 556 

• c. 64 (Criminal Law) — 

8. 5 876 

12 48, 257 

13 48 



Table of 



1886. 



PACE 



7 G. 4, c. 64 — continued. 
■- 8. 14 61, 62 

16 68, 68 

16 68,64 

18 64 

19 ...51, 56, 168, 164, 296 

21 ...61, 78, 88, 84, 166, 

169, 214, 226, 292, 295 

22 246, 248, 249, 279 

23 246, 248, 249 

24 246, 256 

25 246, 256, 257 

ss. 28, 29 261 

8. 80 262 

31 118 

1827. 

7 4 8 G. J, c. 28 (Criminal Lair)— 

8. 1 179 

2 161, 179, 183 

3 200 

— ~ 4 178 

6 91 

7 1299 

8 284 

10 281, 232 

— _ 11 185,206,861,757, 

1811 

— ~ 12 539 

13 178,244 



1827. 

7 k 8 G. 4, c. 53 (Excite)— 

42 

43 



182 
47 



1828. 

9 G. 4, c. 23 (Bank Note*), s. 7 1045 

c. 32 (Pardon), s. 8 179, 246 

c. 54 (Juries, I.) — 

8.9 200 

83 244 

C. 69 (Night Poaching) 67 

8. 1 809, 1244 

2 217, 809, 880, 894 

4 95, 97, 1244 

8 1246 

9 127, 297, 1246 

88. 12, 13 1246 

1829. 

10 G. 4, e. 7 (Roman Catholics), 

88. 29, 34 284 

- c. 24 (Government Annuities), 

?. 41 759 

c. 44 (Metropolitan Police), 

8. 4 868, 1035 

c. 60 (Crown Lands), 8. 124 761 

1880. 

11 G. 4 A 1 W. 4, c. 39 (Pardon), 8. 7 244 



Statute*. 

188L 

PAOB 

1 W. 4, c. 22 (Evidence on Commis- 
sion) 377, 881 

8. 7 1044 

1 as 2X7.4,0. 41 (Special Constable), 809 

8. 11 868 

1882. 

2 <fc 3 W. 4, c. 16 (Excise Permits)— 

b. 8 759, 764 

88. 4, 13 759 

c. M (Army Prize), b. 49 761, 

768 

c. 59 (Government An- 

nuities), 8. 19 759, 761 

c. 71 (Prescription) ... 1222 

c. 115 (Roman Catholic 

Churches) ... 1024 

1888. 

3 A 4 W. 4, c. 49 (Quakers, etc.) 407 

c. 71 (Circuits) 196it 

c. 98 ( Bank of England) 432 

c. 99 (Fines, etc.)— 

88.26-29 117 

32-38 118 

1884. 

41-5 W. 4, c. 86 (Central Criminal 

Court) 86 

88. 2, 8 46, 125 

8. 4 125 

12 257 

16 129, 181 

19 128 

21 125 

22 41, 125 

c. 67 (Transportation) 238. 

c. 76 (Poor Law) 68 

88. 46, 97 562 

b. 48 1252 

109 861 

1886. 

5 & 6 W. 4, c. 24 (Navy, Forgery), 

8. 8 761 

c. 38 (Calendar of Pri- 

soners), b. 3 ... 126 

c. 50 (Highways) — 

8. 21 1288 

84 1217 

95 1210, 1284 

96 1211 

98 1212, 1284 

99 Jglfl 

103 1284 

107 1212 

c. 54 (Marriage) 1176 

c. 62 (Statutory Declara- 

tions) — 

88. 2-4 1072 

8.5 1072 

• 88. 6, 7 1076 

s. 12 1078 



Table of 



. . - «. PAGE 

5 * « W. 4, c 62— continue*. 

— «-!B X076 

— 18 1078 

21 1073 

— ached 1073 

c 69 (Linton, «*c., Pro- 

perty), b. 7 63 

e * 7 W. 4, c. 66 (£*ttere), ». 1 1206 

C- So (Jfarrto^e), s. 2 1172 

*. 4 1175 

16 1172 

88. 19-21 1172 

*. 39 1172 

41 96,751 

42 1175 

c. 96 (Births, Deaths, 

and Marriage* 
Registration — 

s. 85 1172 

88 353, 1172 

41 761,1045 

C. Ill (Previous Con- 

victions) 206, 1312 

c. 114 (Trials for Felony)— 

s. 1 187, 210 

4 576 

1887. 

7 W. 4 A 1 Vict. e. 22 (Births, etc., 

Registration), 
8. 18 ... 194, 1252» 

c. 28 (Pillory) ... 233 

c. 88 (Post Office), 

b. 5 1261n 

c. 36 (Post Office)— 

8. 26 602 

a. 26-29 60S 

8.30 666 

31 606 

86 604 

87 50, 604 

39 506 

40 65, 605 

bb.41,42 505 

c. 77 (Central Cri- 

minal Court), 
88. 1, 3-7 283 

c. 84 (Government 

Annuities), 
s. 1 759 

c. 88 (Piracy)— 

8.2 232,233,644 

3 544 

4 1297 

c. 91 (Punishments), 

b. 1 1008, 1004, 
1088,1105 



1*2 Vict c. 37 (Grand Jury, J.) ... 99 

c. 88 (Vagrancy), s. 2 1191, 

1193 



Statute*. mi 

1888. 

rxon 
1*2 Vict. c. 77 (Affirmations) 407 

c. 82 (Parkhurst Prison)— 

88. 11-18 1031 

8.18 47 

c. 94 (Public Records)— 

st. 1-8 858 

11-18... 845, 352, 853 

19, 20 758 

c. 96 (Banks) 62, 482 

c. 105 (Oaths) 406, 1062 

1880. 

2*3 Vict. c. 47 (Metropolitan Police)— 

s. 5 863 

' 54 (12) 1189 

66 267 

c. 51 (Pensions), 8. 9 ... 761 

c. 71 (Metropolitan Police -* 

Courts) 868 

8. 17 106, 898 

88. 27, 28, 40 267 

c. 93 (County Police)— 

8. 8 868, 1035 

10 194 

c. xciv. (City of London 

Police) 267 

1840. 

3*4 Vict. c. 9 (Parliamentary 

Papers) 995 

C* 72 (Marriage) — 

s.4 ...96, 1045, 1279 

6 1172 

c. 88 (County Police), 

g t 18 9 MO 

c. 92 (Non-Parochial 

Registers) — 

88. 6, 17, 20 ... 854 

8. 8 751 

c. 96 (Post Office Duties), 

88. 22, 28, 26, 
29, 30 760 

c. 97 (Regulation of 

Railways), 
88. 13, 14 888 

c. 110 (Loan Societies), 

8. 8 65 

c. Ill (Joint Stock 

Banks), 
8.2 62,482,556 

1841. 

4*5 Vict. c. 22 (Punishment of 

Peers) 182 

1842. 

5* 6 Vict. c. 28 (Pmwy,/.), 88.16, 18 644 

c. 29 (Pentonville Prison)— 

88. 24, 26 1031 

- b. 28 47 

c. 35 (Income Tax), 8. 36 1261m 

c. 38 (Quarter Sessions) — 

8.1 126 



XXI11 



TaUt of 



1842. 



PACK 



5 4 6 Vict. c. 88 — continued, 

s. 2 102, 129 

3 102 

c. 45 {Copyright), s. 12... 762 

C. 61 (Treason) — 

8. 1 200, 409, 986 

2 200, 289, 961 

3 952 

c. 57 (Poor Law), s. 16... 63 

c. 85 (Joint Stock Banks), 

8. 1 62 

c. 98 (Prisons) 1033 

c, 109 (Parish Constables) 863 

1843. 

6 4 7 Vict. c. 18 (Parliamentary 

Voters) — 

8.81 1284 

ss. 85-89 1265 

s. 88 409, 1265 

c. 30 (Pound Breach) 1114 

c. 40 (Hosiery) — 

ss. 2, 8, 11 ...518, 561 

4. 5, 11 549 

c. 85 (Evidence) — 

s. 1 388,890,891,403 

2 35,75 

c. 86 (Hackney Carriages), 

8.20 762 

c. 96 (Libel)— 

8. 8 257, 528 

4 217, 1118 

6 217, 1118 

6 1119 

7 987, 1119 

8151,259,260,1120 

1844. 

7*8 Vict. c. 2 (Admiralty Offences), 

68. 1-4 41, 42 

c. 19 (Inferior Court) — 

8.5 757 

7 863 

c. 22 (Gold and Silver 

Wares) 763 

c. 24 (Conspiracy) 1276 

c. 29 (Night Poaching), 

s. 1 1245 

c. 81 (Marriage, I.) — 

s.3 1176 

ss.68-70 1173 

c. 101 (Poor Law)— 

s. 2 1046 

8 1279 

9 258 

31 1208 

71 349 

1846. 

8 4 9 Vict. c. 109 (Gaming)— 

ss. 2, 4,5 1198 

6,7 1199 

b. 8 1199 

9 1199 

17 247, 598 



Statutes, 

1845. 

PAGE 

8 4 9 Vict. — continued. 

C. 113 (Evidence) — 

s. 1 177, 357, 358, 878 

2 859 

8 346, 347, 851 

4 758 

c. 114 (Gaol Fees Aboli- 

tion) 228 

1846. 

9 4 10 Vict C. 83 (Seditious Meet- 

ings)— 

8. 1 1000 

c. 59 (Jewish Worship) 1024 

1847. 

10 4 11 Vict. c. 15 (Gas Worts), 8. 29 1185 

c. 89 (Town Police)— 

8.20 863 

28 1189 

66 1218 

1840. 

11 4 12 Vict. c. 12 (Treason Felony)— 

s. 2 986 

3 948 

6 88,949 

6 949 

ss. 7, 8 949 

— ~— B. IV • 3S40, VW 

c. 42 (Indictable 

Offences)— 

8. 3... 105, 107, 128 

10 810, 893 

11 106, 893 

ss. 12, 13, 14 106, 107 

8.17 100,825,828, 

875, 876 

18 825,326,827, 

837 

19 838 

20... 375,410,895 

21 896 

22 126 

23 ...112, 113,114, 

115, 160 

24 115 

25 126 

28 326 

c. 43 (Summary Juris- 

diction) — 

s.ll 94 

12 838 

c. 44 (Justices Protec- 

tion) 1087 

c. 46 (Criminal Pro- 

cedure)^. 4 51,296 

c. 78 (Crown Cases)— 

b. 1 271 

2 278 

ss. 3, 4 275 

s. 5 288 

6 276,757 

c. 121 (Excise Certifi- 

cates), s. 18 759,764 



Ihble of 

X04Uf. 

- - — PACE 

12 £ 13 Vict, c. 45 (Quarter Sessions)— 

b. 10 .. 62, 296 

17 119 

18 1183 

c. 92 (Cruelty to 

Animals) ... 1263 

c. 96 (AdmiraltyCfences, 

Colonies) ... 42, 43 

c. 108 (Poor Law)— 

•. 6 1252 

15 54,566 

as. 16, 17 1208 

I860. 

13 k 14 Vict. c. 26 (Piracy), 8. 2 ... 545 

c. 89 ( Convict Prisons), 

8. 1 1086 

c. 101 (Poor Law)— 

s. 9 246,861 

18 1252» 

1861. 

14 k 15 Vict. c. 19 (Prevention of 

Offences) — 

8.6 218,814 

11 628,809 

88. 12, 18 628 

8. 14 247 

c. 55 (Criminal Justice 

Administration) — 

8.2... 246,247,249 

4 254 

6 249 

6 256,262 

1 88. 7, 8 261, 262 

8.19 44,45,126,258 

28 45,258 

24 46 

c. 92 (Summary Juris- 

diction, /.), 8.6 429 

c. 93 (Petty Sessions, /.), 

b. 19 107 

c. 99 (Evidence)— 

— — — s. 3 •••«••••••.•••• 399 

7... 852, 878, 767 

8 856,767 

12 767 

13 178,860,767 

14 368, 879, 757, 

1170 

16. 1062 

17... 705, 757, 768 

c. 100 (Criminal Pro- 

cedure) — 

«. 1...62, 56, 57, 67, 

68, 71, 75, 76, 

77, 78, 80, 168, 

296 

2 68, 65, 168, 270 

3 68, 270 

§8. 5, 7... 64, 68, 74 

8. 9...91, 92, 170, 171, 

12... 92, 170, 171, 

174, 218 



Statutes. xxxiii 

1861. 

PAGE 

14 k 16 Vict. c. 100— continued. 

8.18 64,77,602,668 

19 248, 1062 

20... 70, 74, 1068 

21 1068 

22 862, 1068 

28 86, 44, 67 

24 36,64,66,77, 

85, 157, 158, 

163, 164, 226, 

801 

25... 85, 66, 82, 

166,279 

27 123 

28 172 

- 29 288 

30 ."66,' 157, 158 

164,824 

c. 102 (Mercantile 

Marine 
Fund),B.6B 761 

c. 106 (Poor Law)) 

s. 18 861 

1862. 

15 k 16 Vict. c. 56 (Chemists) 356 

c. 76 (Common Law 

Procedure) — 

bs. 106, 106 196 

108,110,112,113 197 

8. 116 196 

1868. 

16 k 17 Vict. c. 2 (Bank of England), 

8. 1 724 

c. 30 (Criminal Pro- 

cedure) — 

8.2 119 

s. 9 101, 412, 413 

c. 45 (Government An- 

nuities), 8. 31 759 

c. 73 (Naval Volunteers), 

8. 8 1251h 

c. 83 (Evidence), 8. 3 397 

c. 99 (Penal Servitude)— 

8.6 244 

88. 6, 7, 18, 14 ... 284 

c. 119 (Betting)— 

8. 1 1202 

bs. 2, 8 1208 

4,7, 11,12... 1203 

1864. 

17 k 18 Vict. c. 26 (Treason) 886 

c. 88 (Gaming Houses) — 

s.2 H09 

4 1201 

c. 60 (Cruelty to 

Animals) ... 1253 

c. 102 (Corruvt Prac- 

tices) — 

8. 2 ;.1261 

3 1262 



xxxiT TMe of 

1864. 

PAGE 

17 6 18 Vict. c. 102— continued. 

8. 10... 127, 247, 260, 

1262 

12 259,1268 

18 247,269,1268 

c. 112 (Literary and 

Scientific 
Institutions), 
s. 26 482 

1866. 

18 & 19 Vict. C. 81 (Public Worship) 656 

88. 2. 3. 4, 10, 11 1024 

c. 86 (Religious Wor- 

ship)— 

8. 1 1024 

2 1026 

c. 120 (Metropolis)— 

8.60 357 

96 64 

1866. 

19 4 20 Vict. c. 16 (Central Crimi- 

nal Court) ... 46 

88. 1, 2, 8, 4, 6, 

6, 7 186, 188 

8, 10 410 

8.9 114 

13 186, 258 

bs.25,26... 138,258 

c. 54 ((»ron(i Jury) — 

8. 1... 100, 101, 1044 

88. 2, 3 99 

c. 69 (County and Bo- 

rough Police) 868 

c. 96 (Marriage, &)... 1175 

c. 118 (Foreign Tribu- 

nals Evidence) 1045 

c. 119 (Marriages] 

etc.)— 
8.17 1171 

88. 2, 18... 1045, 1279 

20, 22 1172 

1867. 

20 & 21 Vict. c. 3 (Penal Servi- 

tude)—' 

88.1,2 126,288,286 

8.3 47,286 

as. 4, 6 126, 286 

c. 72 (Police, Scot- 

land), s. 11 893 

- c. 77 (Probate Court), 

8.22 364,865 

28 756 

88. 61, 62 864 

c. 81 (Burials)— 

b. 15 761 

25 155, 1208n 

c. 83 (Obscene Publi- 

cations), 8. 1 1191 

c. 85 ( Divorce Cou rt)— 

8. 13 864 

bs.21,25 60,628 



StatvU*. 

1868. 

FA<J* 

21 k 22 Vict. c. 25 (Non-Parochial 

Registers) — 

88. 1, 3 354 

8. 8 751 

c 73 (Quarter Sessions 

Magistrates),*.!* 231 

c.90 (Medical Pro- 

fession) — 

8. 27 366 

35 ... 198, 1262» 

c. 95 (Probate Court), 

8.19 58 

I860. 

22 Vict. c. 20 (Evidence by Com- 

mission) 377, 1044 

22 Vict c. 25 (Convict Prisons Abroad), 

m. 2, 14, 19 1041 

22 & 28 Vict. c. 17 (Vexatious 

Indictments), 
88. 1, 2 ... 7, 8, 9, 99, 
120, 122 

c. 21 (fines), s. 32 ... 117 

c. 85 (Law of Property) — 

8.24 408,593 

25 409,593 

c. 40 (Naval Volunteers), 

b. 7 1251» 

c. 63 (British Law 

Ascertainment) 847 

1860. 

28 A 24 Vict. c. 18 (Marriage) 1172 

c. 32 (Ecclesiastical 

Jurisdiction)— 

8. 1 1023, 1025 

as. 2, 4, 6 1025 

c. 88 (Law of Property), 

s. 8 499, 593 

c. 75 (Criminal 

Lunatics) — 

8.12 1081 

18 878 

c. 127 (Solicitors), 

s.22 355 

1861. 

24 & 25 Vict. c. 11 (Foreign Law) 347 

- c. 51 (Metrop. Police), 

8.58 863 

c. 70 (Locomotives), 

8.13 1185,1214 

- c. 94 (Accessories, etc.)— 

s. 1 ...18, 19, 46. 87, 
172, 1&00 

2 ...18,87,1800 

8 20, 87, 89, 1806 

4 1806 

5 18,1801 

6 19,1801 

7 18, 21, 46, 1801 

8 ...16,247,1809 

9 42,1808 

c. 96 (Larceny), b. 1 426, 

4*7,688,690 



Table of SiatttUi. 



Xx:*v 



PACK 

24 t 25 Vic c. 9G — cowf iwitcd. 

*.2 427 

a 437 

4 236,438 

5 90,438 

6 ... 90, 311, 428 



1661. 



PACK 



4 ». 

8 . 

9 . 

10 . 

11 . 

1-2 

in 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

29 

30 

31 

32 

33 

34 

36 

37 

38 

39 

40 

41 

42 

43 

44 

45 

46 

47 

48 . 

49 - 

50 . 

51 - 

52 . 

53 . 

54 . 

55 - 

56 . 



L, 1312 

439 

488 

473 

473 

473 

474 

470 

470 

470 

471, 1001 

471 

471 

439 

... 299, 477 

478 

... 299, 479 

600 

497 

485 

493 

491 

488 



484 
488 
490 



57 

68 

59 

GO 

61 

6'2 

63 
64 
B7 



620 

39,216.218,620 
...216,286,620 

239, 620 

621 

621 

101, 621 

622 

, 31, 522 

622 

621 

621 

621 

::::::::::::: <§i 

* 621 

822 

'— ;:::i86,622 

"\ 622 

* 77,622 

• 622 

•;::::::.:.. m 

518 

"* 51,616 

•" 218,464 

"" ....218,666 



24 & 25 Vict. c. 96—con<iwM«7. 

s. 69 ... 64, 218, 467 

70 50,64,218,467. 

676 

71 90, 667 

72 90,171,218,667 

73 668 

74 60,616 

77 247,676 

78 677 

79 677 

80 62,688 

81 62,686 

82 685 

83 686 

84 686 

■ 86 ...S-'S, 329, 678 

86 679 

87 127, 679 

88 70,170,171,218, 

247,698 

89 594 

90 694 

91 ... 21, 171, 646 

92 ... 89, 171, 546 

93 21,87,171,647 

94 82,87,171,647 

95 647 

96 49,648 

97 21 

98 1297 

100 266,267 

101 1091 

102 1092 

103 ...267, 429, 895 

104 480,895 

108 263 

109 480 

114 48,49,480 

115 43,49,430 

116 185,206,207,861, 

480, 1316 

117 ...241,247,481 

119 ; 240,482 

121 247,482 

122 49 

c. 97 {yfaliciouB Damage) 

b. 1 647 

2 847 

8 647 

4 648 

648 

648 

648 

648 

664 

004 

11 218,070 

12 218,070 



5 
6 

4 

8 

9 

10 



13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 



d 



072 
072 
075 
001 
001 
002 



AJCT. 



XXXVI 



Table of Statutes. 



1861. 

24 <fc 25 Vict. c. 96— continued. 
8. 19 



l'AGE 

094 

086 

086 

080 

088 

088 

088 

067 

067 

070 

078 

088 

086 

080 

080 

087 



20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

29 

30 

31 

32 

33 

35 \'.Z'.Z'l72, 688 

36 172,088 

37 088 

38 088 

39 700 

40 082 

41 082 

42 068,679 

43 068,679 

44 .........068,679 

45 664,080 

46 080 

47 081 

48 083 

49 082 

50 1110 

51 700 

52 701 

53 086 

54 004 

55 004 

56 048,1288 

57 048, 894 

58 048 

69 048 

00 048 

61 048 

66 208 

67 060 

72 43, 060 

78 241,060 

75 240,060 

77 247,060 

c. 98 {Forgery) — 



1801. 

24 & 25 Vict. c. 98— continued. 



8. 1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 



721 

741 

770 

741 

746 

747 

742 

722 

764 

764 

765 

728 

748 



88. 14, 16 765 



17 . 




18 . 




19 , 




20 


1 


21 . 

22 

23 


1 

T 

r 


24 


» 


25 


i 


26 


r i 


27 




28 




29 

30 




31 




32 




33 




34 
35 


112, 

i 


36 


i 


37 


i 


38 


t 


39 


i 


40 


i 


41 
42 
43 


47,48 ' 

54,74,' 

74,' 


44 


i 


45 


i 


46 


i 


47 


r 


48 


* 


49 
50 
51 

54 


70&U 

241,' 

247, 


55 




r. 99 (Coinage Offences) 

g. l I 


2 


* 


3 


1 


4 




5 
6 


240, 


i 




8 




9 




10 
11 


2, 


12 


215. 


13 
14 
15 
16 
17 


808, 970, l 
978, 


18 




19 




20 




21 




22 




23 




24 




25 





24 t ±5 VfCt- <■. 99 — amtimmtd. 

•- 27 860 

28 47,860 

29 r 860 

30 860 

31 861 

35 961,1388 

86 48, eia 

37 ... 185, 206, 207, 

861,861 

38 241,863 

42 S46,247,!48,86S 

c. 100 {Offence* again* 

the Perron)— 

•- I 774 

2 ... 2S*. :>.;::. 774 

3 : 774 

4 8», 813 

6 ;1W. 779 

6 ... 08, 1,^8,779 

7 mi. 779 

8 779 

9 37,777 

10 •£ 777 

11 IH, 814 

12 831 

13 823 

14 817 

15 823 

16 1118 

17 858 

18 ... 7a. .'I.-. 839 

19 817 

20 MSj 289 

21 are. 845 

2* 849 

23 218.847 

S3. 24, 26 ... Bft 848 

8.26 2,870 

27 369,874 

28 f4g 

29 849 

SO 850 

81 852 

32 859 

33 853 

84 854 

86 BBS 

rr IS «8 

37 857 

38 881 

ao 1105, 1159 

J5 1105, 1159 

42 ... 174, 'A W 

43 ...175. 369, 830 

44 !«.«»> 

- 45 x-zis, awm 

j*t _.....— IiD,831 

47 216,881 

- T4 aw, mi 

■ 6 2 36S»,897,818 

■ S3 397,897 

64 <W.8B7 

- 56 *4.**Km,Wf, 

— • 899 



IXIVll 

1861. 

C tOO-MMfiNwd. "" 

f. 56 369, 903 

S. ... 34, 46, 1187 

58 809,638 

69 837 

60 VI* 828 

61 280, 838 

62 869,835 

68 22,806 

64 881 

6fi 821 

86 777 

67 777,1388 

68 777 

70 240,778 

71 241,778 

"* 268,871 

M 260,888 

75 260,888 

77 247,883 

1868. 

(. 7 (India Sloct), 

-■ 1, M 743 

c. 20 (ffabau Corpui) 279 
c. 58 (Land Tra—ftr), 
■a. 106, 106, 107, 

138, 139, 760 
f. 61 (ffi^Jl™,)- 

1.11 64 

W 1311 

82 1283 

t. 66 (Homicide) ... 46, 777 
c 67 (Declaration of 

THU),m.U,i7 766 
r. H8(Miw Am Cony. 

rtght), *#.■:.!■ 1120, 
704 
r "9 (' vnjxMttnJ — 

». 18 62, 88 

168 _ 686 

m- 167, 168 687 

». 17* 866 

r. 107 (Jurut)— 

8-l4.'".'.'."iM, 195 

•■ 11 196 

1868. 

e.29 (Election,), ■. S 69, 

866,1888 

c. 44 (Garrotter*)^.,. 189, 

240,681 

r. 78 i lid.,: v.„-t ■ 

•• 13 748 

14 771 

is 

c. 87 (Saving, Bank)— 

».9 687 

10 66 

c. 90 (.Warn™, /.), 

••.17, IB 1178 

c, 108 (MUapproprin. 
lion by Str- 

">»»).*. 1 464 



xxxviii Tatie of 

186$. 

rAGB 

26 & 27 Vict.— continued. 

c. 1 19 {Exhibition 

Medals), s. 5 330 

1864. 

27 k 28 Vict. c. 47 (Penal Servitude)— 

m. 4, 6, 8 1043 

b. 9 1818 

c. 101 (Highways), s. 7 1238 

c. 1 1 7 (Potsonea Grain), 

8.2 692 

1866. 

28 4 29 Vict. c. 18 (Criminal Pro- 

cedure) — 

b. 1 417 

2 208,211 

3 417 

4 428 

5 421 

6 861,404 

7 880 

8 888 

c. 36 (County Voters 

Registration), 

— b. li 1078 

c. 63 (Colonial Laws), 

b. 6 846 

c. 79 (Union Charge- 

ability), g. 9 268 

c. 83 (Locomotives), 

s.12... 1185,1214, 
1217 
c. 89 (Greenwich Hos- 
pital), b. 45 1008 

c. 104 (Crown Suits), 

b. 34 142 

c. 122 (Perjury), 88. 2, 

5 1045 

c. 124 (Admiralty 

Powers) — 

88. 6, 7 761 

8, 9 768 

c. 126 (Prisons)— 

88. 8, 4 1082 

s. 17 (5) 287 

37 1082 

bb. 57, 58 1035 

8.62 126 

88. 63-65 1085 

1866. 

29 A- 30 Vict. c. 25 (Exchequer Bills, 

etc.)— 

ss. 15, 25 722, 723 

20, 21, 25 ... 766 

c. 52 (Costs) 249 

c. 109 (Naval Discip- 

line)- 

8. 83 1011 

84 668,1011 

67 9, 48, 1044 

82 1032 



Siaiulct. 

1866. 

Ml 

29 & 30 Vict. — continued. 

c. 113 (Poor LanO,8.10 12 

— — • C. 117 (Reformatories), 

ss. 14, 15 24 

c. 118 (Industrial 

Schools), 9. \5 2 

1867. 

30 A 31 Vict. c. 19 (Petty Sessions, 

J»), "• i ••»•»« i 

c. 29 (Sale of Bank 

Shares), n. 1, 3 3 

c. 85 (Criminal Law 

Amendment)— 

8. 1 8, 1 

2 10, 120, 5 

3 368,2 

4 i 

— — 5 * 

6 ['.'"."'. 324, 8 

7 5 

9 263,9 

10 I 

c. 84 (Vaccination), 8. 

82 1 

c. 102 (Corrupt 

Practices) — 

8.11 IS 

49 12 

50 IS 

c. 131 (Companies) — 

8. 34 1 

35 ■ 

1868. 

31 A 32 Vict c 24 (Capital Punish- 

ment) — 

88.2,3 ■ 

6, 7, 15, 16 ' 

c. 37 (Documentary 

Evidence) — 

8. 2 848, 

8 ; 

4 

88. 5, 6 j. 5 

— — c. 45 (Sea fisheries) — 

88. 28,42 < 

43,51,52,55,65' 

c. 72 (Promissory Oat hi 

8> 9 i< 

c. 109 (Church Hates 

Abolition)... 

c. 110 (Telegraphs)— 

8. 20 , 

21 65, J 

c. 116 (Ijarceny by 

Partners), 
8. 1 62, 64, 247, 
43* 

c. 121 (Pharmacy) — 

8. 18 

14 

c. 122 (Poor Law), b. 

18 



Table of 



PAGE 

31 1 8 Tuck, — continued . 

— c. 125 {Election Peti- 

tions), b. 21 1040 



52 4 33 Vict- c. 10 (Colonial 

Prt*oH*r# 
Removal) 234 

c. 14 (EjceUe), e. 25... 1072 

c. 24 (Newspapers) , 

b. 1, eched 993 

c. 47 (High Con- 

stables) 1087, 1251 

c. 49 (JLoca* Stamps), 

b. g 760, 766 

c. 62 (Debtors)— 

bb.4-10 892 

b. 6 773 

11 328,1186 

12 25,1187 

13, sub-*. 1 120, 

311, 1148 

2,3 1150 

as. 14, 16 1188 

s. 17 247, 248, 1188 

18 8,10,1138 

19 69,70,120,1188 

20 127,1188 

23 1188 

c. 73 (Telegraphs)- 

a.23 65,508 

24 508 

c. 89 (Costs), s. 10 ... 255 

c. 102 Metropolitan 

Stock)— 

8.19 742 

20 748 

21 747 

c. 106 (East India 

Debentures), 
s. 13 742 

1870. 

a 34 Vkt. c. 14 (Naturalization)— 

88. 4, 6 947 

f.5 198 

14 1073 

C. 23 (Forfeitures)— 

8. 1 ... 101, 110, 178, 

240, 244, 888 

1238 

2 245 

3 268, 280, 263 

4 288 

so. 5, 6 244 

f. 81 887 

e 49 (Marriage, /.)... 1176 

C J 52 (Extradition) ... 107 

0. 16 41 

~" 19 187 

: - M l?SZ$z. 748 

"" 5..«* • 765 

"" ^.•••••••••••••■•»» 748 



Statutes. xxxut 

1870. 

i»acb 

33 a 34 Xict.— continued. 

c. 65 (Stolen Goods), 

m.2,8 1082 

c. 78 (Bridges), 8. 12 1288 

c. 75 {Evidence), s. 83 848 

c. 76 (Debtors) 892 

C. 77 (Juries)— 

8. 6 197 

7 192 

8 192 

9 193 

10 ... 101, 192, 205 

83. 11-14 194 

8. 12 194 

88. 15-18 197 

8. 20 196 

23 213, 222 

c. 79 (Evidence), 8. 21 849, 

1092 

c. J 10 (Matrimonial 

Causes, /.)... 1176 

c. 90 (Foreign Enlist- 
ment) — 

as. 1-5 868 

6-8 854 

9, 10 855 

a. 11 74,868 

- - &8. 12-16 868 

8.17 38,867 

bs. 18-20 857 

~ - 21-29 967 

s. 30 858 

31 958 

32 959 

33 858 

1871. 

34 & 35 Vict. c. 81 (Trade Union)— 

8. 2 1158 

8 65 

12 561 

13, par. 5 356 

18 768 

23 1158 

c. 41 (Gas Works 

Clauses), 8. 9 1185 

c. 48 (Promissory Oaths) 

1251» 

c. 70 (Local Govern- 
ment Board) 349 

c. 105 (Petroleum) ... 1187 

c. 112 (Prevention of 

Crimes) — 

b. 5 1818 

7 1814 

8 1816 

9... 186, 207, 1318 

12 881 

14 1817 

18 178, 818, 881, 

1818 

19 648 

20 186, 1817 



xl 



Thble of 



1872. 



l'AGE 

35 k 36 Vict. c. 10 (Marring*) 1172 

c. 19 (Pacific /gland- 

ers) 848,891 

c. 33 (Ballot)— 

6*. 3, 11,1265, 1266 

s. 20 1271 

24 247,409,1206 

c. 44 (Chancery Fundi)— 

8. 4 760 

12 761 

c. 52 (Grand Jury) ... 125 

c. 65 (Bastardy), s. 8 1047 

c. 92 (Parish Con- 

stable*) 863, 1251 

c. 93 (Pawnbroker*)— 

88. 6,24,49 ... 739 

8. 29 1078 

30 267 

34 267 

38 648 

■ c. 94 (Licensing) — 

8.3 1048 

18 809, 1047 

51 1048 

1878. 

30 dfc 87 Vict. c. 82 (India Stock), 

8. 13 742 

c. 60 (Extradition) ... 107 

8.5 1045 

c. 66 (Judicature) — 

8. 16... 113, 115, 117, 

125, 128, 220 

26 149 

29... 125, 128,230 

32 117 

33 115 

84 113,129 

47 ... 271, 289, 294 

61 345 

66 1100 

100 271 

c. 71 (Salmon ftshery), 

8.13 680 

c. 88 (Slave Trade), 

8.26 50,545 

c. 92 (Constable) 863 

1874. 

37 & 38 Vict. c. 3 (East India De- 
bentures), s. 13 742 

c. 35 (Stat. Law Rev.) 544 

c. 36 (Personation) — 

8s. 1,2 772 

8.3. 127,772 

c. 42 (Building Societies) — 

b. 9 65 

20 366 

31 561 

c. 81 (Great Seal 

Office*), s. 5 359 

c. 88 (Births and 

Deaths Regis- 
tration) — 
8. 38 858, 354 

40 752 



Statute*. 

1874. 

1'A 

37 & 38 Vict. c. 88— continued. 

8.45 * 

46 96, ; 

c. 96 (Stat. Law Rev.) 1 

1875. 

88 & 39 Vict. C. 17 (Explosive*) i 

8.80 11 

81 \ 

86 1 

as. 91, 92... 762, 11 

8. 102 11 

c. 22 (Post Office)— 

F.3 

88. 10. 11 5 

c. 24 (Falsification of 

Account*) — 

b. 1 82, e 

2 I 

8 247, C 

4 I 

C. 25 (Public Stores}— 

w. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 1C 

12, 18, 17, 18 1C 

sched 1G 

c. 55 (Public Health)— 

88.91,111 1182,1 

116-119 1165, 1 

8. 142 1 

144 

149 

171 1 

186 

216 1 

326 

c. 68 (Food and Drugs)- 

88. 2, 8, 4, 5, 8 t 

8. 27 768, 1 

— 28 i: 

c. 77 (Judicature) — 

s. 19 ...113, 115, 

271, 

23 ... 86, 46, . 

c. 83 (Local Loans), 

8. 32 781, 742. 
c. 86 (Conspiracy, etc.)- 

8.8 1 

88. 4, 5 1 

- 8. 6 

7 82,1 

9 ...»6, 247», 1 

B8. 11,12, 14 ... 1 

15, 16 1 

C. 87 (Land Transfer)- 

8.99 

88. 100-102 

8. 108 880 

1878. 

89 & 40 Vict. c. 22 (Trade Union) — 

8. 3 

6 

11 ] 

16 1 



Table of 
1876. 

PAGK 

30 & 40 Vict* — continued. 

c. 36 (Custom*)— 

8.9 194,1251* 

i8 759 

29 ...65,467,575 

85 558 

bs. 150, 151 971 

s. 168 759, 1072 

189 1017 

190 895, 1015 

191 1010 

193 286, 867 

217 1081 

229 47, 

255 

257 95, 

258 47, 

259 142 

260 868 

261 868 

c. 57 (Winter Assizes) 36, 

196» 

c. 59 (Appellate Juris- 

diction), 88. 3| 
4,10 280 

c. 77 ( Vivisection), 88. 

2, 6, 14, 15, 21 1253 

1877. 

40 * 41 Vict. c. 2 (Treasury Bills), 

s. 10 728, 764 

c 14 (Evidence) 382, 1214 

c. 21 (Prison)— 

88.28,30 1035 

8. 40 

41 ... 

48 63 

c 25 (Law List), s. 16 355 

c 26 (Companies), s. 6 356 

c. 46 (Winter Assizes) 36, 

196m 

c. 51 (East India 

Loans), 8. 15 742 

c. 59 (Colonial Stock), 

s. 21...748, 748, 771 

1878. 

11 * 42 Vict, c 14 (Baths, etc.), 

8. 11 1189 

c. 31 (Bills of Sale), 

8.17 72,1044 

c. 33 (Dentists)— 

8. 29 856 

30 193, 1252n 

c. 49 (Weights and 

Measures). .. 620 

c. 73 (Territorial 

Waters Juris- 
diction}— 

»». 2, 3, 4, 7 ... 41 

*- 6 539. 545 

c . 77 (^Mtghways and 
Zjoamoiites)— 
s- 10 1212 



Statute*. xli 

1878. 

PACK 

41 k 42 Vict. c. 77— continued, 

8.21 1240 

88 1218 

1879. 

42 & 43 Vict. c. 1 (Spring Assizes) . 36, 

196n 

C. 11 (Bankers Books 

Evidence) — 
88.3,4,5,6,7,8 884 

9, 10, 11 886 

c. 18 (Racecourses, 

Licensing) ... 1207 

c. 19 (Inebriates), 8. 8 80, 

1820 

c. 21 (Customs and In- 

land Revenue) — 
8.10 1017 

14 1017 

c. 22 (Prosecution of 

Offences) 188, 1260 
— — s. 2 . 272 

' 5 \'"'m,'d7b, 1090 

7 10,266 

c. 34 (Children's 

Dangerous Per- 
formances) ... 369 

bs. 3, 4 876 

c. 47 (Petroleum) 1187 

c. 49 (Summary Juris- 

diction) — 

s. 10, 8ub-8. 5...22, 23, 

689 

11 23,689 

88. 11-14 561 

8. 12 1322 

16 244 

sub-s. 2 ... 174 

17 6, 72, 247, 260 

20(1) 838 

24 896 

25 892 

27, sub-s. 8 ... 267 

3,4 175, 
177 

28 249, 1323 

29 (2) 1326 

87 898 

89 803 

42 114 

49 241 

c. 55 (Prevention of 

Crime), 8. 2 1814 

c. 59 (Statute Law 

Revision) 82 

c. GO (East India 

Loans), 8. 14 742 

1880. 

43 Vict. c. 10 (East India Loam), 

8. 12 742 

43 & 44 Vict, c! 9 (Time), "sTi '620, 1245 

c. 19 (Taxes)— 

8.40 194 

66 1072 



xlii 



Table of Statute*. 



1880. 



FACE 



43 *fc 44 Vict. — continued. 

c. 33 (Post Office)— 

s. 3 782 

4, sub-8. 1, 2 760 

4 482,760 

c. 41 (Burials), 8. 7 1021, 

1025 

- c. 45 (Criminal Law 

Amendment), 
s.2 918 

- — - c. 47 (O'tvund Game) All 

1881. 

44 Jt 45 Vict. c. 19 (Newspaper) ... 1092 

c. 37 (Alkali Work*) 1183, 

1185 

c. 48 (London County 

Council), s.33 858 

c. 58 (Army)— 

88. 12, 14 1005 

17, 18 1011 

- 20, 22 1032 

68,70 851 

e. 142 (2) 769 

147 193 

153 1005 

156 (7) 1009 

c. 60 (Newtpaper 

Libel)— 

88. 1,4,5 1120 

8. 6 8,1121 

15 ... 865, 1121 

18 1121 

c. 62 (Veterinary 

Surgeons), b. 9 856 

c. 64 (Central Cri- 

minal Court, 
Pritont) — 

b. 2, sub-s. 2 41,125 

5... 745 

c. 67 (Petroleum) 1187 

c. 68 (Judicature) 

b. 15 271 

c. G9 (Fugitive Offen- 
der*) 107, 186 

is. 20, 21 43 

1882. 

45 k 46 Vict. c. 9 (Documentary 

Evidence) — 
s. 2 846, 847, 850, 851 

8 758 

c. 48 (Reterve Force*), 

b. 7 1251» 

c. 49 (Militia), b. 41 1251n 

c. 50 (Municipal Cor- 

poration*) — 

s. 22, sub*. 6, 6 857, 

858 

24 858 

34 1250 

77 1271 

117 676 



1882. 

45 h 46 Vict. c. 50— continued. 

s. 119 1240 

165 126 

169 257,258 

186, sub-8. 1 ... 101, 

192 

188 45,863 

191 863,1038 

222 119 

. 228 893 

235 768 

242 45,1163 

c. 56 (Electric Light- 
ing), 8. 23 ... 439 

c. 61 (Bill* of Exchange) — 

bs. 3(1), 5, 83(1) 729 

8. 73 729, 733 

c. 72 (Revenue), 

b. 11, Bnb-8. 2... 885 

c. 75 (Married Women** 

Property). ..32, 240 

b. 1 628,1145 

w. 2, 5 1145 

8. 1280,801,443,460 

1680,448,460,655 

1888. 

46 & 47 Vict. c. 3 (Explosive Sub- 

stance*) — 

b. 2 884 

bb. 3, 4, 5 

8.6 380, 

7 38,90, 

88. 8, 9 887 

C. 22 (Sea fisheries), 

8.17 247,761 

< c. 27 (Metropolitan 

Board of Work*), 
8. 21 728 

c. 38 ( Trial of Luna- 

tic*), bb. 2, 4 ... 221 

c. 44 (Borough Con- 

stables), 8. 27 ... 863 

C. 45 (Counterfeit 

Medal*), bb. 2, 3 885 

c. 49 (Stat. Law Rev.), 

bb. 8, 5 (b) 191 

c. 51 (Corrupt and 

Illegal Pract ice*) , 
M. 1, 2, 3, 6 1255 

B. 33 (7) 1258 

88 (8) 1258 

41 (4) 1258 

43 1258 

88. 45, 50 1258 

s. 51 96, 247, 1258 

52 217,219,1259 

53 ... 69, 120, 127, 

260, 856, 1259 

bs. 56, 57, 58, 59 1200 

8. 57 (2) ... 247, 260 

59 (1) 830 

60 1281 

64 1255 

65 1258* 



Table of 



1888. 



46 £ 47 Vict— continued. 

e, 52 (Bankruptcy)— 

8.17(8) ...329, 1146 

«. 17, 24 ... 328, 329 

«. 27... 328, 329, 1046 

30 (3) 367 

31 1147 

32 1262 

70 1143 

83 65 

92 (1) 896, 1188 

100 896 

103 1137 

w. 132-138, 140 867, 

368, 1143 

8. 149 (2) ... 70, 1188 

152 U46 

163 247 

164 896, 1188 

as. 165-168 1140 

c. 53 (Revenue), s. 17 782 

1884 
47 4 48 Viet. c. 14 {Harried Women's 

Property) ... 397 
c. 19 (Summary Juris- 
diction, /.), a*. 
4 6 7 9 23 
c. 20 (Greek ^Marriages)\\ll 

c 30 (Great Seal) ... 351 

~ c 31 (Colonial Prisoners 

Removal) 234 

~ — c-Sl (Judicature),*. 15 142 
c. 64 (Criminal Lunatics) 

183, 221 
■ c 70 (Municipal Elec- 
tions)-- 

«. 1 1266 

2 1207 

21, 8ub-». 5 1287 

23 1287 

7 S* 811 ^ 4 M87 

£ T 1287 

30 69,96,127,217, 

247, 830, 356, 

1260 

ZZ S (2) W5fO 

34 1266 

35 69,96,127.330, 
^ m 357, 1287 

* 69,127,830,357, 

c. 72 (Dismmd Burial*** 

m -~ ,^™&».3...4,1208 

C. sB (Po* Ojke Pro- 

text'm)-. 

'" J 70S 

% 1264 

Jl -760,766 

12, mb*. 5 608 

\% 606 

if 702 

w 608 



Statutes. xliii 

1886. 

TAGS 

48 ft 49 Vict. c. 28 (East India Loans), 

b. 12 742 

« c. 69 (Criminal Law 

Amendment) — 

».2 410,820 

3 MO 

4 ...888,410,821 

SB. 4, 5 344 

b. 5, sab-8. 1 96, 217, 

818 
sub-s. 2 ... 808 

6 808 

7 802 

8 821 

9 218,808 

10 921 

11 ...828,369,826 

12 814 

13 1198 

17 8,127,802 

- 18 ...247,261,802 

20 808 

c. 75 (Assault on Police). 

is- 1, 2 882 

1887. 

50 A 51 Vict. c. xiii. (City of London) 

127, 1267 

c. 20 (Criminal Pro- 

cedure, I.) ... 1013 

c. 25 (First Offenders)-- 

M. 1, 2 248 

8,4 244 

- c. 78 (Merchandise 

Maris)— 

l. 2...6, 604, 620, 704, 

1161 

3 1162 

is. 4, 5, 6 U64 

7, 8, 9 1166 

10-12 U66 

b. 13 8, 1157 

14 247, 259, 261, 

1166 

15 1166 

18 U66 

19 330,1167 

c. 53 (Sheriffs)— 

8.8(2) 862,893 

IS 776 

27 1015 

29 898, 1084 

• 39 1088 

c. 58 (Coal Mines Regu- 

lation), s. 82... 762 

fi. 71 (Coroners) -....5, 153 

8. 8 153, 155 

4(1) 154,1068 

(2) 156,377 

(8) 164, 166 

(5; 156,158 

6 876 

8.(1) 159 

2) 160 

3) 169 



xliv 



Table of Statutes. 



1887. 



FAGK 



50 k 51 Vict. c. 71— continued. 

s. 6 155, 1208* 

7(1) 157 

8 ... 154, 192, 1084 

9 159 

18(1) 157,158,159 

(2) 157, 159 

, 166 



(2). 
(4) 



(5) 
19(2) 

20 .... 

21 .... 

36 .... 

37 .... 
40(1) 
45 .... 



.165, 376 
.... 155 
.... 158 
.... 156 
.... 1015 
.... 156 
.... 157 
.... 158 



1888. 

51 «fc 52 Vict. c. 3 (Stat. Law Rer.), 

8. 1, par. 2 

c. 41 (Local Govern- 
ment) — 



110 



257 
257 



s. 3 63, 1195, 1218, 
1840 

6 64, 1240 

U 1240 

22(5) 857 

23 358 

24 256 

32, sub-B. 

1 (6) ... 
8 (a) ... 

34 (2) 1240 

35, Btib-8. 5, 8 257 

38 257 

67 257 

75...69,96,127,217, 
247, 357, 1250, 

1271 

78(3) 1241 

79 (2) 1241 

83(6) 195 

88 192, 257 

89...27, 88, 46, 125, 
192,193,195,197 

100 261 

c. 48 (County Courts) — 

b. 28 366, 1066 

33 565 

48 862 

78 1066 

jB3 1064 

87 1046 

180 757 

185 1045 

c. 46 (Oaths)— 

B. 1... 889, 407, 408. 
1068 

2 207,408 

3 389, 406 

5 406 

c. 64 (Law of Libel) — 

bb. 1, 3, 4 1121 

p. 7 75,1192 

8 150, 1122 



1888. 

l'AGl 

51 & 62 Vict. c. 64— continued. 

b. 9 1122 

— — c. 65 (Solicitors) , b. 5 355 

1888. 

52 & 53 Vict. c. 10 (Commissioners 

for Oaths)... 133 

b. 1 772, 1054 

3 360, 1054 

6 855, 1054 

7... 217, 305, 1054 

9 38, 48, 1054 

11 1054 

c. 12 (Assises Relief)— 

B. 1 126 

3 124, 126 

5 102, 128, 129 

c. 18 (Indecent Ad- 

vertisements) 1192 

c. 45 (Factors) — 

8.2(2) 682 

BB. 8, 9 268 

c. 52 (Official Secret*)— 

8. 1 1011 

68. 2,3 1012 

b. 4 247,1012 

5 1012 

6 ...38, 127, 1018 

bb. 7,8,9 1018 

b. 10 1014 

c. 63 (Interpretation)— 

s. 1 11 

2 11,953 

8 97,231 

9 846 

12, Bab-B. 2 349,607 

Bub-ss. 4, 8 849 

cnb-e. 11... 607 

21 1078 

24 893 

S3 4, 170, 174 

34 43 

85 80 

38, sub-B. 1 760, 887 

1 «... /, OOI 

1277 

42 4 

c. 69 (Public Bodies 

Corrupt Prac- 
tices) — 
b. 1 1272 

bb. 2, 8, 4 1278 

5 247, 1278 

6 127, 1274 

7 1274 

1880. 

53 & 54 Vict. c. 5 (Lunacy)— 

8.147 758 

88.207-229 873 

B. 297 1208 

815 34 

322 2, 878 

324 806 

325 873 



Table of 
1890. 

FACE 

53 k 54 Vict. c. 5— continued. 

8. 341 24, 878 

c 7 (Commissioner g for 

Oaths), l. 1 ... 1054 

c. 21 (Inland Revenue)— 

i. 8 194, 1251n 

10 .. 1081 

c 87 (Foreign Juris- 

diction) 42,186,847 

c 44 (Judicature), 

88, 1, 4 •••...••• 293 

C 59 (Public Health), 

8.51 1195 

■ c 71 (Bankruptcy)— 

8. 2, sub- 8. 1 ... 1146 

8 1136 

26 ...70,247,1187 

27 ...328,329,579 

29 879 

c ecadiii. (London 

County Coun- 
cil), 8. 36 ... 194 

1891. 

W * & Vict. c. 15 (Merchandise 

Maris), 
89.1,2 1157 

c. 38 (Stamp Duties 

Management) — 

b. 13 759 

m. 14-16 766 

b. 18 760 

24 1046 

28 760 

c. 39 (Stamps), 

8. 14 (4) 383 

c. 46 (Post Office)— 

8.4 511 

88. 10, 12 (2) ... 504 

c. 68 (County Council 

Elections) ... 1270 

C. 69 (Penal Servitude)— 

s.l... 285,286,237 

2 1048,1816 

a 1048 

4 1&3, 1818, 1316 

5 1048 

6 1816 

c. 76 (Public Health, 

London) — 

8.28 1186 

47 1165, 1186 

89 1208 

188 1182, 1185 

1892. 

55 £ 56 Vict. c. 4 (Betting and Loans, 

Infants)— 

m. J, 2 1948 

3, 4, 6 1348 

c. 19 (Stat. Law Rev.) 286 

». 1 1277 

c- 23 (Foreign 

Marriage) 365, 
1173,1174 



Statute*. xlr 

1898. 

PAGE 

55 k 56 Vict. c. 2Z— continued. 

f. 13 1173 

15 ... 38, 48, 1045, 

1279 

16 354 

19 1174 

c. 30 (Alkali Works) 1183, 

1185 

c. 56 (Coroners), 8. 1 (3) 

159. 1068 

c. 59 ( Telegraphs), 8. 1 689 

c. 64 ( Witnesses at 

Public Inquiries), 
88. 1-5, 7 1078 

1898. 

56 & 57 Vict. c. 15 (Music, etc., 

Licences, Middle- 
sex) 1195 

c. 39 (Industrial and 

Provident 
Society) — 

8. 3 65 

8 356 

21 65 

64 561 

75 865 

— — c. 48 (Reformatory) — 

8. 1 241 

2 242 

c. 54 (Stat. Law Rev.) 287 

C. 61 (Public Authorities 

Protection), 88. 

1, 2 96 

c. 66 (Statutory Rules 

Publication) 848 

c. 70 (Eatt India Loam), 

g. 17 742 

c. 71 (Sale of Goods)— 

b. 22 (2) 265 

25 268,582 

62 

1894. 

c. 73 (Local Govern- 

ment) — 

8.8(6) 1272 

88. 5, 19 63, 562 

8. 5 (2) 195 

20 (5) 1272 

28(5) 1272 

25 64, 1218 

oo 562 

86 299 

48...69, 96, 127, 217, 

247, 857, 1250, 
1271 

52 (5) 63, 562 

59 358 

74 (4) 1272 

ached. 1, pt. 8 858 

57 A 58 Vict. c. 6 (Quarter Se$$ion*) 126 



xlvi 



Table of 



1894. 



PAG I 



57 & 58 Vict. — continued. 

C. 19 (Merchandise 

Marls)— 

8.1 1157 

2 1168 

C CO (Merchant Skip- 

ping)— 

B. 64,sub-8. 2, 8 

864,660 

66 763 

73 871 

ss. 104, 180 763 

154, 184 763 

». 187 88, 868 

188 868 

ss. 220-238 786 

8.225 661 



240 
248 
253 
282 
457 
564 
666 



854 

668 

854 
763 
1252 
763 
688 



88.667-679 681 

680, 684 868 

685-687 42,860 

8.689 411 

691 877,411 

- 695 (8) (4) ... 763 

700 247 

701 258 

88.719,720 855 

8.742 880 

1886. 

58 k 59 Vict. c. 9 (Evidence) 349 

c. 33 {Extradition) ... 107 

- c. 89 (Summary Juris- 

diction : Married 
Women) — 

8.4 628,881 

5 628,888 

1888. 

69 * 60 Vict. c. 14 (Short Title*) ... 81 

C. 25 (Friendly Societies) — 

8.11 356 

82 564 

51 64 

87 661 

bs. 96, 100 856 

c. 26 (Industrial and 

Collecting 
Societies), 8. 14 561 

c. 86 (Locomotives) — 

8.1 1814 

6 1187 

ached 1215 

c. 52 (Larceny) ...247, 266 

8.1 50,488 

C, 57 (Burglary), s. 1 126. 



Statutes. 

1807. 

TXQM 

60 & 61 Vict. C. 18 (Juries, Deten- 

tion) 213, 222 

c. 80 (Police Property) 267 

c. 62 (Dangerous 

Performances) , 

869,878 

c. 65 (Land Transfer), 

ns. 20, 26 767 

1886: 

61 £ 62 Vict. c. 6 (Juries) 197 

c. 7 (Bail)... 112, 113, 160 

c. 13 (East India 

Loans), 8. 8... 742 

c. 29 (Locomotives)... 1215, 

1217 

c. 86 (Criminal Evi- 

dence) 101, 210, 211, 
214 

8.1 826,827,830, 

sab-8. (a) ... 

(b) 208,212, 

(<-■) ... 884 

(d) ... 894 

if) ... 894 

C/)806,318, 

896,419 

{g) ... 896 

(A)209^96 

2 895, 396 

3... 208,211,896 

*"""""" Bo. 4, O, I ......... oW 

ached 807 

c. 41 (Prison)— 

8. 1 1032 

5 240 

6... 239, 968 

10... 812, 895, 

1088 

11101,108,418 

14 231 

16(2) 237,239 

C. 46 (Revenue), 

8. 12... 769, 766 

C 48 (Benefices), 

8. 1 (4) ... 1046 

C. 68 (Marnage) 1171 

8. 7 753 

13 1172 

c. 60 (Inebriates)— 

8. 1 

2... 247, 249, 

88. 8, 4 1322 

5, 6, 8, 9, 21 1323 

8. 29 30, 1888 

sehed. 1 1323 

1889. 

62 A 63 Vict. c. 12 (Reformatories), 

». 1 848 

- c. 14 (London Govern- 

ment)... 69, 96, 127, 
247 



TMeof 

lsee. 

PACK 

I? k 63 Vict. c. U-*ontinued. 

8. 2 867, 1272 

5(2) 858 

6 64 

7 1250 

11 195 

8. 30 1250 

Mbed. 2 858 

c. 22 (Suwnnary Juris- 

dicthn), 8. 3 597 

c. 23 (Anchors and 

Chain Cabin)... 620 

c. 83 (Board of Educa- 

tion 849 

c. 85 (Inebriates), 247, 249. 

1828 

c. 51 (Food and Drugs) — 

s. 1 1158 

m. 12, 19, 20 ... 1186 

8.26 1184 

1900. 

63 4 64 Vict. c. 28 (Inebriate* £.), 

w. 2,8 1324 

c. 48 (Companies), 

b.28 687 

r. 51 (Money Lender*) — 

w. 4, 6 594 

8.5 1248 

1901. 

1 EJr. 7, e. 10 (Larceny), 62, 127, 247, 

266, 267, 828 

8. 1 678 

2 678 

c. 20 ( Youthful Offender*)— 

8. 1 ~ 

5 241 

1 1 241, 245 

14 ~ 28 

c. (Fatlorie*), 8. 118 ... 1252it 

c. 25 (EaM India Loans), 

». 7 742 

1908. 

2 Edw. 7. c. 8 (Cremation) — 

i. 8. 1209 

10 154, 1208 



Statute. ilvii 

1902. 

TAOft 

2 Edw. 7— continued. 

c. 28 (Ucentina) 1824 

c. 42 (Education) 1270 

1908. 

3 Edw. 7, c. 6 (Naval Volunteer*), 

8. 1 1251m 

c. 24 (Education) 1270 

c. 31 (Board of Agricul- 

tu re) 849 

c. 86 (Motor <tovj"i'.'li 1216 

c. 88 (Poor Prisoner* De- 

fence) — 

8.1 187,255 

88.2,3 188 

8.4 189 

1904. 

4 Edw. 7, c. 15 (Prevention of Cruelty 

to Children)— 

8. 1 2, 877 

m. 2,3 878 

4,5 878 

8. 6 879 

__ 7 &8Q 

88. 8,9, W.V.V.V..V.V 881 

8. 11 1820 

12 898, 

18 871, 875, 

14 871, 

15...368, 869, 871, 889. 

893, 410, 888 

88. 16, 17, 18 884 

8.19 885 

20 247,886 

21 258,886 

22 885 

28 784, 804, 886 

24 888 

25 8,888 

26 886 

27 96, 918 

28 796, 888 

29 888 

88. 80, 31, 32 887 

s. 83 887 

■ c. 29 (Expiring Late* Con- 
tinuance) 249 



TABLE OF CASES. 



PAGE 

A. r. B. (1889), 24 L. B. Ir. 286 . . 265 
Abbott, R. p. (1847), 1 Den. 273 601, 602 

(1908), 67 J. P. Rep. 

151.. 14, 821, 822, 786 
Abergele, R. r. (1836), 5 A. ft £. 

795. .134, 185 
Abingdon (Lord), R. r. (1794), 1 

Esp. 226. .993, 995 
Abraham, R.r. (1798), 2 East, P. C. 

941 736 
Abrahams, R. p. (1897), Cent Cr.Ct! 260 
Abrahat, R. r. (1798), 2 Leacb, 824 461 
Absolon, R. r. (1859), 1 P. ft F. 498 1280 
Ackroyd, R. r. (1848), 1 C. A K. 

156. .861, 1319 
Acton (W.), R. r. (1729), 17 St Tr. 

462.. 783 
Adam (Till) r. Bristol (lobabs.) 

(1834), 2 A. ft E. 389. . 97 
Adams, R. r. (1812), R. ft R. 225 59, 447, 

456 

(1829), 3 C. ft P. 600 340 

(1842), C. ft Mar. 299 166, 



370 

(1844), 1 Den. 38 .. 447 

(1879), 14 Cox, 215 . . 1061 

(1888), 22 Q. B. D. 66 1123, 

1129 
Adamson, R. p. (1842), 1 C. ft K. 192 614 
Adamthwaite p. Synge (1816), 4 

Camp. 372. . 379 
Adderbuy Bast, R. p. (1843). 13 L. 

J. (M. C.) 9. . 1236 
Addis, R. p. (1884), 6 C. ft P. 888. . 809 
Aden, R. r. (1873), 12 Cox, 572 . . 458 
Adey, R. p. (1831), 1 M. ft Rob. 94 399 

(1850), 1 Den. 571 . .560, 562 

Admiralty Case, The (1610), 12 Co. 

Rep. 79. . 39 
Advocate (Lord) r. Fraser (1901), 3 

Fraser (Just. 
Gas.), 67 . .389, 888 

Sinclair (1890), 

17Rettie(Jiist 
Cas.), 88 .. 187 
Ady, R. p. (1835), 7 C ft P. 140 . . 618 
AgMconrt, The (1824), 1 Hagg. 

(Adm.)271.. 796 
Agnew v. Jobson (1877), 13 Cox, 625 834 
Aheame, R. p. (1852), 6 Cox, 7 (Ir.) 186, 

1285 1288 
Afektos, R. r. (1784), 1 Leach, 294' 817, 

450 



PA OK 

Aickles, R. r. (1785), 1 Leach, 890 1043 

(1787), 1 Leach, 438 714 

Airey, R. r. (1802), 2 East, P. C. 

831.. 598 
Alton r. Stephen (1876J, 1 App. Cas. 

456.. 316 
Alabaster p. Harness (1896), 1 Q. B. 

389 1080 
Albert, R. p. (1843), 5 Q. B. 37 ! ! 36 
Alberty r. U. 8. (1895), 162 U. S. 

499.. 797n 
Aldrich p. Wright (1873), 53 New 

Hampshire, 898 797 

Aldridge, R. p. (1849), 4 Cox, 148 469 
Alexander, R. p. (1880), MS. . .144, 152 

p. Angle (1830), 1 Cr. ft 

J. 143. . 1180 
AlforJ, R. r. (1776), 14 East, 218a 301, 

1062 
Alison, R. p. (1838), 8 C. ft P. 418 14, 

81,786 
Alivon r. Furnival (1834), I Cr. M. 

ft R. 277.. 379 
Allan, R. r. (1841), C. ft Mar. 295. . 1028 
Allanson p. Butler (1668), 1 Sid. 

830.. 895 
Alldav, R. p. (1837), 8 C. ft P. 136 219, 

759 
Allen, R. p. (1823), R. ft R. 518 . . 476 
1826), 1 Mood. 154 . . 804 
:1835), 7 C. ft P. 153. . 802 
'1887), 1 Mood. 494. .40, 540 
1839), 9 C. ft P. 31 .. 911 
1840), 2 Mood. 179 . . 907 
1844), 1 C. ft K. 495. . 77 
1848), 1 Den. 864 . .23, 924 
1862), IB. ft S. 860 140,141 

(1866), 10 Cox, 405 . . 40 

(1867), 17 L. T. 222 . . 806 

(1872), L. R. 1 C. C. R. 

867.. 1178 

Re (1904), 2 Ir. Rep. 565 193» 

Allen p. Allen (1894), Prob. 248 . . 420 

Flood (1898), App. Cas. 1 343, 

1160, 1162, 1281 

L.S. W. R. (1870), 40 L. J. 

(Q. B.)55.. 894 

Small (1904), 2 Ir. Rep. 705 1253 

Westley (1629), HeUey, 97 1048, 

1060 
Alleyne, R. p. (1851), Q. B. Dec. 1 290 

- p. R. (1855), 5 E. ft B. 892 284, 

285, 291 



1 



TaMe of Cam. 



PAGE 

Allbusen r. Labouchere (1878), 3 

Q. B. D. 654.. 899 
Allington, R. r. (1893), 9T.LR, 

199. • 609 
Allison, R. r. (L806), R. 4 R. 109.. 1170, 

1178 

(1888), 16 Cox, 559.. 1133 

Allu n, R. p. (1846), 2 Cox, 62 . . 102 
Almoo, R. r. ( 1770), 5 Bur. 2686 998,1094 
Alsop, R. p. (1869), 11 Cox, 264 . . 1049 
Altass, R. p. (1843), 1 Cox, 17 . . 1048 
Althausen, R. p. (1898), 17 Cox, 680 854, 

1172 
Aires p. Bunbury (1814), 4 Camp. 28 379 
Ambury. R. 0. (1852), 6 Cox, 79 262,1043 
Amery, R. 0. (1786), 1 T. R. 868 . . 45 
Amey, R. 0. (1823), R. * R. 500 . . 474 

— p. Long (1808), 9 East. 473 412 
Amier, R. p. (1834), 6 C. & P. 844 468, 

640 
Amos, R. 0. (1851), 2 Deo. 65 . . 654 
Amphlit, R. r. (1825), 4 B. * C. 85 993 
Anderson 0. Gorrie (1895), 1 Q. B. 

668.. 147 
— R. p. (1816), 8 Ross. Cr. 

(6th ed.), 63. . 789 

(1840), 2 Ir. Law 

Rep. 262.. 150 

(1843), 2 M. * Rob. 

469. .606, 784, 787 

(1868), 11 Cox, 154 378 

(1868), L. R. 1 C. C. 

R. 161. .40, 41, 540 
Anderson, Ex parte (I860), 30 L. J. 

(Q. B.)129.. 279 
Anderton's Case (1698), 12 St Tr. 

1245.. 940 
Andrews, R. p. (1837), 2M. A Rob. 

87. .1247, 1249 

(1841), C. & Mar. 

121. .639, 641 

(1845), 1 Cox, 183. . 391 

Annet, R. 0. (1767), 1 W. Bl. 895 . . 1022 
Anon. (1612), 12 Co. Rep. 87 . .792, 794 

— (1639), W. Jones, 444 .. 836 

— (1678), 1 Vent. 256 . . . . 1225 

— (1684), 1 Vent. 869 .. 121,122 

— (1696), SSalk. 187 .. .. 6 

— (1701), 2 East, P. C. 654| 

— (1703), 1 Salk. 880 . . 

— (1704), 1 East, P. C. 268 

— (1710), 1 Salk. 289 .. 

— (1723), 1 Str. 533 .. 

— (1756), 2 East, P. C. 659 

— (1763), Lofft. 146 .. 

— (1775), 1 East, P. C. 261 

— (1781), 2Esst, P. C. 698 

— (1782), 2 East, P. C. 556 

— (1794), 2 East, P. C. 652 

— (1810), R. A R. 177 . . 

— (1815), 2 Chit. (K. B.)422.. 



61 
120 
801 
402 
155 

81 
600 
796 
502 
464 

58 
101 
213 

— (1819), 1 Chit. (K. B.) 698 . .70, 71 

— (tMC«/t.),Rowe(Ir.K. B.),655 147 






i 



VaC 
34* 
334 



[incert.), Rowe (Ir. K. B.), 

644 727. • 
— (1822), R. A R. 489 . .' !! 



146 
56 



14« 
.. 831 
56 
.. 837 
.. Ill 
147, 148 
• • tfiU 
247, 258 
.. 138 
.. 975 
.. 415 
395 



Anon. (1826), 2 C. & P. 549 

— (1829), 1 Lewin, 107. . 

— ( 1829), 2 Ir. Uw Ree. (O. S.), 

479.. 

— (1830), 1 B. * Ad. 382 
1834), 6 C. * P. 408 
1886), 2 Lewin, 48 .. 
1836), 2 Lewin, 260 . . 

'1836), 4 A. A E. 576» 
1838), 2 Mood. 40 .. 
1838), 8 A. & E. 689 
1842), 6 Jur. (O. 8.) 181 
1845), 1 Cox, 250 .. 
|1898), Cent. Cr. Ct. . . 
(1898), 88 L. J. Newsp. 563 
Antrobus, R. p. (1835), 2 A. & E. 

788. .318, 749 
Aplev, R. 0. (1844), 1 Cox, 71 . . 1169 
Apothecaries Co. 0. Bentley (1824), 

1 C. * P. 588. . 304 
Appleby, R. p. (1821), 3 Stark. 

(N. P.) 83. . 338 
Appleton p. Braybrook (Lord) (1816), 

6M. 4 8. 84.. 379 
Archer, R. p. (1826), 1 Mood. 143 32, 87, 

551 

(1843), 2 Mood. 283. . 817 

(1848), 3 Cox, 228 .. 394 

(1855), Dears. 449 .. 599 

(1858), 1 F. & F. 851 805 

Ardaseer Cursetjee p. Peroseboye 

(1856), 10 Moore (P. C), 375 1173 
Ardingp. Flower (1800), 8 T. R. 684 413 
Ardley, R. p. (1871), L. R. 1 C. C. R. 

301.. 603 
Ardslev, R. p. (1877), 8 Q. B. D. 

255.. 1238 
Argent, R. p. (1826), 1 Mood. 154. . 804 
Aria, R. p. (1834), 6 C. * P. 848 . . 663 
Armanni, R. p. (1899), Cent. Cr. Ct. 439 
Armstrong, R. p. (1875), 18 Cox, 184 42 

- p.Kiernan(l855),7Cox,6 148 

- r. Mitchell (1908), 67 

J. P. Rep. 629. .692, 1263 
Arnold, R. p. (1724), 16 St Tr. 695 24, 25 

(1838), 8 C. & P. 621 826, 

884,872 
Arnould, R. p. (1857), 8 E. A B. 500 1210, 

1212, 1234 
Arrowsmith p. Le Mesurier (1806), 

2 B. & P. (N. R.) 211. . 892 
Arscott, R. p. (1884), 6 C. & P. 408 787, 

739 
Arton, Jfc (No. 2), (1896), 1 Q. B. 

509. .686. 591, 70S 
Arundel, R. p. (1849), 4 Cox, 260.. 894m 
Ashburn, R. r. (1887), 8 C. A P. 50 1057 
Ashby, R. p. (I860), 2 F. & F. 660 716 
Ashby Folville, R. p. (1866), L R. 

1 Q. B. 213. .1226, 1227 
Ashe, R. p. (1845), 1 Cox, 150 . . 224 
Ashley, R. p. (1848), 1 C. <fc K. 198 629 
Ashmall, R. 0. (1840), 9 C. & P. 286 1801 
Ashman, R. p. (1858), 1 F. * F. 88 842 
Ashton, R. p. (1881), 2 B. A Ad. 750 673 

(1837), 2 Lewin, 147 824 



TabU of Case*. 



li 



PAGE 

AjhwcU, R. r. (1885). 16 Q. B. D. 

190. 449 
Askant, R. r. (1711), 1 Seas. Cm*. 

(K. B.) 159. . 88 
A&lett, R. r. (No. 1), (1804), R. A K. 

67.. 558 

(No. 2), ( 1 804), 2 Leach, 

958.. 501 
Aspinall,R. r. (1877),2Q.B.D. 48; 

1Q. B. D. 730.. 85, 280, 
281, 290, 1280, 1282, 
1283, 1285, 1289 
Aspindall r. Brown (1789), 3 T. B. 

265.. 1221 
A.«pfio, K. r. (1873), 12 Cox, 391 . . 754 
i, R. r. (1592), K. B. Roll. 938 
r, R. r. (1835), 7 C. * P. 191 598 
r,"R. r. (1792), 2 East, P. C. 

729.. 524 
Alton, R. r. (1838), 2 Rum. Cr. 

(6th ed.) 678. . 721 
Aston Ingham, R. r. (1840), 1 Ross. 

Cr. (6th ed.) 823. . 1234 
Ateheson r. Everitt (1776), 1 Cowp. 

383 407 
Athay, R. r. (1758), 2 Burr. 653 ! ! 149 
Athea, R. r. (1832), 1 Hood. 329 .. 630 
Atkins, E. r. (1765), 3 Burr. 1706. . 5 
Atkinson r. Jameson (1792), 5 T. R. 

25.. 895 

— R. r. (1707), 1 Balk. 382 86 

(1784), 1 Leach, 302 461 

(1788), 1 Wins. Saond. 

(6th ed.) 249, note 1 102 

(1799), 2 East, P. C. 

673.. 447 

(1814), 1 Bass. Cr. 

(6th ed.) 159. . 33 

(1837), 7 CAP. 669 713 

(LS41), C. h Mar. 

325. .733, 740 

(1842), C. A Mar. 525 62 

(1869), 11 Cox, 830 1099. 

1102 
AtL-Gen. r. Biphoephated Guano 
Co. (1878), 11 Co. 

D. 327. . 1224 

Bradbury h Evans 

(1851), 7 Ex. 97.. 1120 

Briant (1846). 15 M. 

* W. 169. . 402 

Brighton & Hove Co.- 

op. Supply Aas. 
(1900), 1 Ch. 276. . 1216 

British Museum 

(Trustees) (1903), 

2 Ch. 598. . 1015 

Balpit (1821), 9 Price* 414 

Churchill (1841), 8 

M. * W. 193. . 46 

Cole (190 J ), 1 Ch. 205 1185 

Edison Telephone Co. 

(1881), 6 Q. B. D. 

244.. 689 

Gas Light* Coke Co. 

(l«77>,7Ch.D.217 1185 

iXJ>. 



PAGE 

Att.-Gen. r. Keymer Brick 4 Tile 
Co. (1908), 67 J. P. 

Kep. 431.. 1180 

Le Merchant (1788), 

2 T. R. 201n. . 316 

Logan (1891), 2 Q. B. 

100.. 1186 

L.N.W. R. (1900), 1 

Q. B. 78. .11, 1185 

Moore (1893), 1 Ch. 

676.. 1015 

Nottingham (Mayor, 

etc.) (1904), 1 Ch. 

678.. 1185 
Oxford Canal Navi- 
gation (1908), 72 

L. J. Ch. 285. . 1288 

Parsons (1836), 2 

M. A W. 23. . 198 

Radloff (1864), 10 

Ex.84.. 142 

Ray (1843), 11 M. * 

W. 464. . 144 

Siddon (1820), 1 Cr. 

6 J. 220. . 993 

Sillem (1868), 2 H. 

AC. 431.. 956 

Staffordshire County 

Council (1905), 1 
Ch. 386.. 1224, 1225, 1240 

Terry (1874), L. R. 

9 Ch. App. 426m . . 1185, 

1219 

Theakston (1820), 8 

Price, 89. . 350 

Yorkshire ( W. Riding) 

C. C. (1908), 67 J. 

P. Rep. 103 ..1286,1238 

(of Duchy of Lancaster) 

v. Devonshire (Duke) 
(1885), 14 Q. B. D. 

195. . 142 

(of Hong Kong) r. 

Kwok a Sing (1873), 

L. R. 6 P. C. 179. .21, 589 

(of N. S. W.), Macleod 

v. (1891), App. Cas. 

455. .37, 1167 m 

(of N. 8. W.), v. Mac- 

pherson(1870),L.R. 

3 P. C. 268. . 72 

(of New Zealand), v. 

Brown (1898), App. 

Cas. 284. . 81 

(of Ontario), r. Scully 

(1902), 4 Ont. L. R. 

894 **28 
Attwell, R. r. (1801), 2 East, P. C. 

768. .18, 551 
Atwood v. Joliife (1848), 8 New 

Sess. Cas. 116. . 1109 
Atwood, R. v. (1617), Cro. Jac. 421 1022 

(1787), 2 Leach, 464 891 

Audley (Lord), R. v. (1631), 8 St 

Tr 401 898 
Auffret, R. r. (1898), 62 J. 1\ 621*. '. 766 

6 



lii 



Table of Cases. 



TACK 

Austin, K. r. (1672). 1 Vent. 189 . . 6 

1887), 7 C. & P. 796 90 

'1846), 1 C. A K. 621 97 

I860), 4 Cox, 887 .. 103 

(1855), Dean. 612 .. 872 

Autey, R. r. (1857), Dean. A B. 294 784 

Avery, R. r. (1888), 8 C. A P. 596 401, 

725 

(1845), 1 Cox, 206 .. 891 

(1859), Bell, 150 . . 459 

Axtell, R. p. (1661), Kel. (J.), 13 . . 80 

Ayes, R. p. (1810), R. * R. 166 . . 790 
Aylesford Peerage Claim (1885), 11 

App. Can. 1. . 820 
Aylett, R. p. (1785), 1 T. R. 68 . ,67, 84, 

1044, 1056 

— p. R. (1788), 3 Bro. P. C. 529 94 

— R. p. (1888), 8 C. 4c P. 669 876 
Ayley, R. p. (1881), 15 Cox, 828. . 1169 
Azire, R. r. (1725), 1 Str. 688 . . 898 
Azzopardi, R. r. (1843), 6 St. Tr. 

(N. 8.) 21.. 87 



B. (alia* A.) r. B. (1891), 27 L. R. 

Ir. 587,608.. 1176 
Backler, R. r. (1881), 5 C. * P. 118 888, 

716 
Badcock, R. v. (1813), R. & R. 249 18, 720 
Badische Anilin und Soda Fabrik 
r. Bnsle Chemical Works (1898), 

App. Cas. 200. .86, 87, 89, 44 
Badger. R. r. (1848), 4 Q. B. 468 . . 110, 

111,147 
Bahama Islands, Re a special re- 
ference from (1893), App. Cas. 188 1095 
Bagg, R. p. (1615), 1 Rolle Rep. 79 75 
Bagge v. Whitehead (1892), 2 Q. B. 

856.. 1084 
Baikic r. Chandless (1811), 8 Camp. 

17,20.. 863 

Bailey, R. r. (1721), Andr. 229 (cit.) 1182 

1744), 2 Str. 1211 ,. 122 

1800), R. AR. 1 .. 83 

1818), R. A R. 841 .. 633 

1824), 1 Mood. 23 .. 630 

(1850), 4 Cox, 892 .. 619 

(1852), 6 Cox, 29 .. 297 

(1852), Dears. 244. .623, 637 

(1871), 12 Cox, 56 . . 567 

(1872), L. R. 1 C. C. R. 

847. .441, 494, 495 
Bailey r. Jameson (1876). 1 C. P. D. 

829 1228 
Baillie, R. p. (1859), 8 Cox. 288 ! ! 900 
Bain, R. p. (1862). L. * C. 129 . . 644 
Baines, R. p. (1708), 2 Ld. Raym 

1265.. 1084 

(1886), Wood-Renton, 

Lunacy, 912. . 29 

(Mary) R. p. (1900), 19 

Cox, 524.. 81, 82, 551, 1808 
Bainton, R. p. (1738), 2 Str. 1088. . 102, 

120, 162 
Bake, R. p. (1765), 8 Bnrr. 1781 . .5, 1113 



PAGE 

Baker, R. r. (1783), 1 Leach, 290. . 624 

(1829), 1 Mood. 231 . . 785 

(1837), 2 M. A Rob. 58 828 

(1848), 1 C. A K. 254 884, 

848 

(1849), 3 Cox, 581 .. 621, 

624, 688 

(1891), 113 CentCr.Ct. 



Seas. Pap. 374, 589. . 1077 
»7 ..1044, 
1048,1050 



(1896) 



. rap. a/- 
. 1 Q. B. 



Bakewell, R. p. (1802), R. <t R. 85 558 
Baldock, R. p. (1846), 2 Cox, 55 . . 662 
Baldry, R. p. (1852), 2 Den. 480 831, 386 
Balfour, R. p. (1895), Q. B. D., Oct. 15 

», 1 . .62, 829, 589 
Ball, R. p. (1807), R. <t R. 182 . .311, 720 

(1824), 1 Mood. 80 . . 654 

(1882), 1 Mood. 880 . .809, 867 

(1884), 6 C. A P. 563 ..1002, 

1098 

(1889), 8 C. * P. 745 .. 418 

(1842), C. & Mar. 249 . . 602 

(1854), 6 Cox, 860 . . 1050 

Ball, Ex parte (1879), 10 Ch. D.667 

264,265 
Balls, R. r. (1886), 7 C. & P. 416, 

426, 429. .717, 721 

(1871), L. R. ICC. R. 

328.. 573 
Balme, R. r. (1777), 2 Cowp. 648 4, 1088 
Balmerino (Lord), R. p. (1746), 18 

St. Tr. 441.. 940 
Baltimore (Lord), R. p. (1768), 4 

Burr. 2179. .12, 1300 
Bamber, R. r. (1848), 5 Q. B. 279. . 1224, 

1231 
Bambridge, R. p. (1730), 17 St. Tr. 

888,897.. 783 
Bamfield, R. p. (1884), 1 Mood. 416 

784, 737 
Bamford p. Tnrnley (1862), 8 B. 6 

S. 62.. 1185 
Bank Prosecutions (1810), B. <k R. 

878.. 715 
Bank of N. S. W. r. Piper (1897), 

App. Cas. 888 . . 85 
Banks r. Goodfellow (1870), L. R. 5 

Q. B. 549. .28, 24 
Banks, R. p. (1794), 1 Esp. 145 . . 1010 

(1821), R. * R. 441 . . 454 

(1878), 12 Cox, 893 . . 1294 

Bannen, R. p. (1844),1 C.& K.295. . 12, 982 
Banson p. Offley (1687), 2 Show. 

610 . . 15 
Barber r. Peuley (1893), 2 Ch. 447 

1180, 1181, 1216 

- R. r. (1844), 1 C. £ K. 484. . 209. 

727 

(1844), 1 C. & K. 442. . 17 

Barclay p. Pearson (1893), 2 Ch. 

154.. 1207 
Barham's Case (1677), 4 Co. Rep. 

20a.. 1129 
Barium, R. p. (1826), 1 Mood. 151 

866, 1248 



Table of Cases. 



liii 



Met r. Braham (1773), fc W. Xtt. 

- R. r. (WOO), 1 East, 186 *. 
— (1829), 3C.&P. 589. 



PAQK 



Barnett r. 



893 
147 
812 

910 

— (1868), 1 ¥. t F. 826 656 

— (J890), 25 Q. B. D.213 

1227, 1231 
Ikrier, Re (1890). 25 Q. B. 1>. 285 1 136 
&riey, R. p. (1847), 2 Cox, 191 . . 414 
Baraaxd, R. r. (1837), 7 C. & P. 784 

604 606 
BuBudCartle,iLr. (1841), lO t,. J. ' 

(M. C) 53 . . 1211 
Baraar.Hollowav (1799), 8 T. H. 

150.. 802 

— r, Tiompowsky (1797), 7 

T. R. 2G6. .380, 381 

— r. Ward (1850), 9 C. B. 392 1186 

— R. t. (1835), 7 C. A P. 166. . 261 

(1850), 2 Ben. 69 . . 448, 

456,598 

(1358), 8 Cox, 129 .. 566 

(I860), LR.1C. C. R. 

45. .61, 296 

(1867), 10 Cox, 539 . . 1065 
Campbell (1902), 21 

N. Z. L. R. 484. . 267 

— R. r. (1818), 2 Robs. Cr. 

(6th ed.) 284 49 

(1848). 2 C. 4 K. 594 529, 

530 

Raznoldswick, R. r. (1843), 4 Q. B. 

499 • . 1229 
Ban, R. r. (1814), 4 Camp. 16 *. '. 1222 
Raxracloagh v. Brown (1897), App. 

Cat. 615. . 1219 
Barratt, R. v. (1840), 9 C. * P. 887 898 

(1373), L. R. 2 C.C.R. 

81.. 909 

Barrett, R. r. (1836), 2 Lewin, 264 186 

(1846), 2 C. & K. 343 802 

(1352), 6 Cox, 78 . .249, 261 

(1862), L. 4 C. 263 . . 1197 

(1870), Ir.« Rep. 4 

C. L. 285 . . 188 

(1885), 15 Cox, 658.. 905 

(1899), 130 Cent. Cr. 

Ct. Seas. Pap. 797 708 

Barrett r. Long (1851), 8 St. Tr. 

(N. S.)1076.. 197 
Earroet R. r. (1853), 1E.4B.1.. 21, 

38,111,789 
Barrow r. Hamphreys (1820), 3 B. 

A Aid. 598.. 413 

— R. f. (1866), 10 Cox, 407 . . 212n 

(1868), L. B. 1 C. C. R. 

156.. 906, 909 

Barry, R. r. (1865), 4 F. A F. 889. . 92 
BartfacJenij, R. r. (1852), 1E.4B. 

8.. Ill, 116 
Eartbolomew, R. r. (1844), 1 C ft K. 

' 866.. 1056 

Butktt, R. p. (1841), 2 M. * B?*-** 7» 
— (J843), ID.*!* 95 1056, 



FAO£ 

Bartlett, R. r. (1831), 2 Deac. Cr. L. 

1517.. 676 

(1846), 2 C. ft K. 321 187 

Bartlett, Ex parte (1861), 30 L. J. 

(M. C.) 65 . . 1210 

Hartley, R. p. (1899) (unreported) 1044 
Barton, R. p. (1826), 1 Mood. 141 80, 712 

(1848), 3 Cox, 275 . . 27 

Bass, R. 9. (1782), 1 Leach, 258 . . 461 

Bassett, R. r. (1843), 1 Cox, 51 . . 90 
Bastin r. Carew (1824), By. ft M. 

127.. 418 
Batchelor r. Hone wood (1799), 2 

Eap. 714.. 883 
Bate, R. r. (1871), 11 Cox, 686 . . 327, 

831, 824, 826 
Bateman r. Black (1852), 18 Q. B. 

870.. 1228 

- R. r. (1845), 1 Cox, 186 . . 714 

(1857), 8 E. ft B. 584 1188 

(1866), 4 F. ft F. 

1068.. 327 
Bates, R. r. (1848), 3 Cox, 201 . . 596, 

600,607 

(I860), 2 F. ft F. 817 . . 872 

Batatone, R. p. (1866), 10 Cox, 20. . 658, 

657 
Batt, R. r. (1884), 6 C. ft P. 829 . . 670, 

671 
Battama, B. p. (1801), 1 East, 298. . 129 
Battier, R. r. (1880), 44 J. P. 490 . . 8 
Batty, R. p. (1842), 2 Mood. 257 .. 565 
Baald, R. r. (1876), 18 Cox, 282 . . 1162 
Bairm, R. p. (1843), 1 Cox, 83 . . 1300 
Baxter, R. p. (1793), 5 T. R. 88. . 80, 549 

(1851), 5 Cox, 302 . . 571, 

1014 
Bayard, R. p. (1892), 2 Q. B. 181 184, 187 
Bavley, R. p. (1856), Dears, ft B. 1 21 565 
Baylis, R. v. (1762), 3 Burr. 1318 . . 147 

(1849), 4 Cox, 23 . . 388 

Baynes p. Brewster (1841), 2 Q. B. 

D. 375.. 808 

Bazeley, R. p. (1799), 2 Leach, 835 462 

Beacall, R. p. (1824), 1 Mood. 16 . . 66 

(1824), 1 C. ft P. 810, 

454.. 178, 244, 560, 561 
Beach, R. p. (1774), 1 Cowp. 229 . , 802, 

717 
Beadle, R. p. (1857), 26 L. J. (M. C.) 

111.. 114 
Beak r. Tbyrwhit (1688), 3 Mod. 

194. . 171 
Bcake p. Tyrrell (1688), 1 Show. 6* 171 
Bealc, R. p. (1798), 1 East, 183, cit. 145, 

1081 

(1865), L. R. 1 C. C. R. 

10. .915, 918 
Beall, R. p. (1899), Q. B. D. . . 113 

(1899), 84 L. J. Newsp. 

623.. 1290 
Beaman, R. p. (1842), C. ft Mar. 695 461 
Beamish p. Beamish (1859), 9 H. L. 

C. 247.. 1174 
Beamon p. Ellice (1831), 4 C. ft P. 

585 . . 414 



li/ 



Table of Cases. 



PACK 

Bean, R. r. (1842), 4 St. Tr. (N. S.) 

1382 952 
Beaney, R. r. (1820), R. A R. 416.' .' 217, 

468 
Bear, R. p. (1696), 3 Salk. 226 . . 302 

(1698), 2 Salk. 417 . . 1127 

Beard, R. p. (1837), 8 C. & P. 143. . 211, 

715 

— r. U. S. (1894), 158 U. S. 650 797» 
Beardmore, R. p. (1836), 7 C. A P. 

497 . . 124 

(1838), 8 C. 4 P. 

260. .418, 422 
Bcardsall, R. r. (1876), 1 Q. B. D. 

452.. 1266 
Beardsley p. Giddings ( 1904), 1 K. B. 94 
Beare, R. p. (1698), 1 Ld. Raym. 414 998 
Beaton, R. p. (1764), 1 W. Bl. 479. . 178 
Beatson p. Skene (1860), 6 H. A N. 

838.. 1132 
Beatty v. Cnllingworth (1896), 60 

J. P. 740 . . 820 

— r. Gilbanks (1882),9 Q. B. D. 

808 1099 
Beaty p. Glenister (1884), 51 L. T. 

304.. 1099 
Beaumont p. Mountain (1834), 10 

Bing. 404.. 346 
— R. p. (1854), Dears. 270. . 670 
Beaurain v. Scott (1812), 3 Camp. 

388.. 364 
Beaver, R. v. (1866), 10 Cox, 274 . . 100 
Beawfage's Case (1613), 10 Co. Rep. 

996, 102a. . 1084 
Beck p. Beverley (1843), 11 M. A W. 

845 . . 80 
— R. p. (1889), 16 Cox, 710 . . 1137 
Beckett, R. p. (1886), 1 M. A Rob. 

526 . . 841 
Becklev, R. r. (1888), 20 Q. B. D. 

187 8 122 
Beckwith p. Philby (1827), 6 B. AC. ' 

635 . . 807, 894 
Beddall p. Maitland (1881), 17 Ch. D. 

174.. 1112 
Bedfordshire, R. p. (18£5), 4 £. A B. 

585 . .318, 1228 
Bedingfield, R. r. (1879), 14 Cox, 

341. .318, 323 
Bcebv, R. p. (1838), 8 L. J. (M. C.) 

38 . 1226 
Becchev, R. r. (1817), R. A R. 319! .' 562 
Beeley'p. Wingfield (1809), 11 East 

46. .832. 1090k 
Beer, R. p. (1898), 62 J. P. 120. .888, 926 
Beere, R. p. (1843), 2 M. A Rob. 472 214, 

224 
Beeston, R. p. (1854), Dears. 405 . . 371 
Beeton, R. p. (1849), 1 Den. 414 . . 549 
Beezley, R. p. (1830), 4 C. A P. 220 414, 

415 425 
Brighton, R. p. (1897), 18 Cox, 535 '913, 

918 
Belany, R. r. (incert.), 3 Cox, 82, tit. 414 
Bell, R. v. (1753), 1 East, P. C. 169 984 

(1831), 5 C. A P. 162 ., 837 



I'AuE 

Bell, R. r. (1871), 12 Cox, 37 . . 8, 10, 74, 

120, 1143, 1190 

(1874), Ir. Rep. 8 C. L. 

542. .824, 826 

(1877), 13 Cox, 623 .. 61 

Bell p. Stone (1795), 1 B. A P. 331. . 1127 
Bellamy, R. p. (1824), Ry. A M. 171 362, 

866 

- p. Wells (1890), 39 W. R. 

158. .1181, 1184, 1216 
Bellencontre, Re (1891), 2 Q. B. 122 

457, 676 
Bellgrave, R. p. (1889), Guildford 

Assizes. .1079, 108O 
Bellingham, R. v. (1812), Coll. Lon. 

636 Add. .. 25 
Bellis, R. p. (1893), 62 L. J. (M. C.) 

155 . . 905 
Belstead, R. p. (1820), R. A R. 411 60 
Belton, R. p. (1696), 1 Salk. 872. . 121, 122 
— p. Busby (1899), 2Q. B. 380 1204 
Bembridge, R. p. (1783), 22 St. Tr. 1 1014 
Benesech, R. r. (1796), Peake, Add. 

Cas. 93.. 1048, 1060 
Benfield, R. p. (1760), 2 Burr. 980. . 82, 

86, 91, 145 
Benford p. Sims (1898), 2 Q. B. 641 1310 
Benge, R. p. (1865), 4 F. A F. 604. . 802 
Bengough p. Kossiter (1792), 4 T. R. 

606 . . 104 
Bennet p. Watson (1814), 3 M. A 

Sel. 1.. 895 
Bennett, R. p. (1815), R. A R. 289. . 631, 

633, 646 

(1861), 2 Den. 240 . . 1064 

(1858), Bell, 1 . . 803, 1186 

(1866), 4 F. A F. 1105 834, 

920 

(1894),63L.J.(M.C.) 

181.. 561 
Benson, R. p. (1811), 2 Camp. 508. . 36a 
Bent, R. p. (1845), 1 Den. 157 . . 79, 1264, 

1265 
Bentley p. Vilmont (1888), 12 App. 

Cas. 471. .266, 268, 269, 466 
Bentley, R. p. (1850), 4 Cox, 408 . . 842 
Berchet, R. p. (1690), 1 Show. 106. . 142 
Berenger (de), R. p. See De Berenger. 
Berens, R. p. (1866), 4 F. A F. 842 209 
Berger, R. p. (1894), 1 Q. B. 823 . . 291, 

362, 1216 
Berkeley Peerage Claim (1811), 4 

Camp. 401 . . 380 
Bernadotti, R. p. (1869), 11 Cox, 

316. .321, 324 
Bernard, R. r. (1868), 8 St. Tr. 

(N. S.) 887 . . 37, 179, 272, 420, 813, 

814, 1285 
Berriman, R. r. (1854), 6 Cox, 388. . 326, 

335, 825 
Berrimann, R. p. (1838), 5 C. A P. 

601.. 56 
Berry p. Adam son (1827), 6 B. A C. 

528 892 
Berry, R. p. (1791), 4 T. R. 217 ".". 75, 

302, 998 



Table of Cases. 



-» PAO« 

Benr, R. r. (1835), 1M.4 Rob. 463 779 

(18»), Bell, 46 . .1046, 1049 

(1859), Bell, 95 .. 459 

(1876), 1 Q. B. D. 447 24, 

184 221 

(1897), 104 L. T. J. 110 ' 

184 186 
Berraaan r. Wise (1791), 4 T. R.366 ' 

1097, 1131 
Bertnad, B. r. (1867), LR.1P.C. 

520. .214, 224, 279, 291,416 
Berwick's Cue (1746), 1 8 St. Tr. 367 325 
Besfldl r. Wilson (1853), 12 L. T. 

(O. S.) 233. . 267 
Best, R. r. (1705), 2 Ld. Rajm. 1167 

1278, 1285 

(1839), 9 C. & P. 368 . . 1094 

Betaell, Re (1888), 38 Ch. D. 220. . 1173 
Betterton's Cue (1695), cas. temp. 

Holt, 538.. 1181 
Belts, R. r. (1850), 16 Q. B. 1022. . 1185, 

1219 

(1859), Bell, 90 . . 569 

Bererlev'6 Case (1603), 4 Co. Rep. 

125 . . 24 
BeceiflfY (Mayor, etc., of) r. Craven 

" (1838), 2 M. A Rob. 140 . . 345 
Eanei, R. r. (1903), 67 J. P. Rep. 

443.. 268 
BibHhe's Case (1598), 4 Co. Rep. 436 17 
Kckentaff, R. r. (1848), 2 C. k K. 

761.. 
Bidwell, R. r. (1847), 1 Den. 222 . . 



512 

74, 

1088 

80 



Bien, R. 9. (1834), 1 A. * E. 827 . . 
Bigamy Law of Canada, Re (1897), 

27 Canada 461 .. 37, 1167 
Bigg, R. r. (1717), 3 P. Wms. 419 . . 73, 

713 
Biggleswade R. D. C, R. p. (1900), 

61 J. P. 442. .1210, 1211, 1213, 1221 
KlnAgbam, B. r. (1825), 2 C. k P. 

234 • . 1099 
Bmglev, R. v. (1821), R. k R. 446 ' 13, 

307, 715 

(1833), 5 C. k P. 602 526 

Bingley U. D. C. r. Ferrand (1903), 

67 J. P. Rep. 370. .1214, 1232 
Binkea, R. r. (1805), 2 Smith (K. B.), 

620 . . 161 
BirchaB, R. v. (1866), 4 F. k F. 1087 

800 802 
Bircheooogfa, R. v. (1836), 7 C. <fc P. ' 

575.. 172 

Kid r. Jones (18 15), 7 Q. B. 742 . . 892 

— R. r. (1839), 9 C. & P. 44 . . 59, 632 

(I860), 5 Cox, 1 . . 795 

(1850), 5 Cox, 1 1 . .272, 277 

(1851), 2 Den. 94 . . 170 

(1872), 42 L. J. (M. C.) 

44.. 77 

(1891), 17 Cox, 387. .1060,1064 

(1898), 62 J. P. 760 . . 327, 

* " 830, 337, 393 

BrirfftHo/brook(1828),4Bin S .6^ 804 
Bfofeeje, B. r. (1880), 4 C. * P. 386 308 



PACK 

Birket, R. r. (1830), 4 C. & P. 216 800, 

469 
Birkett, R. v. (1805), B. k R. 86 . . 718 

(1813), R. k R. 251. . 891, 

711, 713 

(1889), 2 C. k P. 732 391 

Birmingham and Gloucester Rail. 

Co., R. v. (1840), 2 Q.B. 

47.. 11, 130,134 
Birmingham, R. p. (1828), 8 B. 4 C. 

29.. 1174 

(1841), 3 Q. B. 

224 . . 166, 167 

(1861), IB. kS. 

763.. 321 
Birt r. Barlow (1779), 1 Doog. 171 358 

— R. v. (1881), 6 C. k P. 154 1099,1103 

(1899), 63 J. P. 828 . . 589, 590 

Bishop, R. v. (1738), Andr. 220 . . 122 

(1822), 5 B. k Aid. 612 149 

(1879), 5 Q. B. D. 269 34 

Bishop Auckland, R. p. (1834), 1 

A.4E. 744. . 1229 
Bishop Auckland L. B. p. Bishop 
Auckland Iron Co. (1882), 10 Q. 

B. D. 138.. 1184 
Bispham, R. p. (1830), 4 C. k P. 392 404 
Bias, R. v. (1839), 8 C. k P. 778 .. 67 
Biswell, R. p. (1847), 2 Cox, 279 . . 900 
Bitton, R. p. (1833), 6 C. k P. 92 . . 179 
Bjornsen, R. p. (1865), L. k C. 545 40 

860 
Blabv, R. p. (1894), 2 Q. B. 170 . . 230, 

978, 132U 
Blackburn, R. p. (1853), 6 Cox, 333 332, 

417 

(1868), 11 Cox, 157 663 

Blackburn v. Hargreave (1828), 2 

Lenin, 259. . 411 
Blackham, R. p. (1787), 2 East, 

P. C. 711.. 526 
Blackson, R. p. (1837), 8 C. k P. 43 89 
Blades, R. p. (1880) (unreported) . . 210 
~ p. Higgs (1865), 11 H. L. C. 

621.. 438 
Blake, R. p. (1844), 6 Q. B. 126 1282, 1288 
Blakemao, R. p. (I860), 3 C. k K. 

97. . 200 
Blakemorc, R. p. (1852), 2 Den. 410 278, 

1232 
Blandv, R. p. (1752), 18 St. Tr. 1117 820 
Bleasdale, R. p. (1848), 2 C. k K. 

765. .12, 90, 307, 312, 436, 483 
Blenkinsop, R. p. (1847), 1 Deo. 276 730 
Blick, R. p. (1830), 4 C. k P. 377 . . 491 
Bliss p. Hall (1838), 4 Bing. (N. C.) 

183.. 1184 
Blower p. Hoi lis (1833), 1 Cr. k M. 

893. . 363 
Boater p. R. (1888), 21 Q. B. D. 284 217, 

231, 280,1119,1123 

— R. p. (1888), Short k Mellor, 

Cr. Off. Pr. 93. . 131 

(1892), 17 Cox, 669. .125, 132 

Boardman, R. r. (1838), 2 M. k Rob. 

147. .80, 712 



Ivi 



Table of Cases. 



PAGE 



Bode (Baron de) r. B. (1845), 8 Q. B. 

208.. 347 
Boden, B. p. (1844), 1 C. 4 K. 895 440 
Bodkin. B. p. (1868), 9 Cox, 403 . . 335 
Bodle, B. p. (1838), 6C.4P. 186. . 414 
Boggett r. Frier (1809), 11 East, 301 628 
BoEm, B. p. (1839), Boscoe, Cr. Ev. 

(12th ed.) 211.. 248 
Bolland, Ex parte (1828), Mont. 4 

Mac. 814, 397.. 264 
Bolland, B. p. (1772), 1 Leach, 83. . 713 
Bolts, B. p. (1826), 5B.4C. 334. . 227 
Bolton (Lord) p. Torolin (1822), 5 

A. A E. 856.. 418 
Bolus, B. v. (1870), 23 L. T. 339 . . 1144 
Bond, B. v. (1716, 1 Str. 22 . . 1208» 

(1798), 27 St. Tr. 623. . 946 

(1849), 1 Den. 517 . .77, 327, 

435 
Bond r. Evans (1890), 24 Q. B. D. 

249. • 35 

— r. Plumb (1894), 1 Q. B. 169* 1204 
Bonelli (in bonis) (1876), 1 P. D. 69 347 
Bonner, B. r. (1834), 6 C. 4 P. 386 321, 

323 
Bonnet, B. p. (1718), 15 St Tr. 1231 539, 

540 
Bontien, B. p. (1813), B. 4 B. 260 713, 714 
Boober, B. r. (1850), 4 Cox, 272 . . 982 
Booth, B. v. (1796), B. 4 B. 47n . . 1088 

(1872), 12 Cox, 281 900, 901, 

902 
Bootie, B. v. (1759), 2 Burr. 864 . . 84 
Bootyman, B. p. (1832), 5 C. A P. 

800. .71, 560 
Borebam, B. p. (1847), 2 Cox, 189 733 
Boroaki, B. p. (1682), 9 St. Tr. 1 . . 338 
Borrett, B. p. (1833), 6 C. 4 P. 124 510, 

511 
Borron, B. p. (1820), 3 B. 4 Aid. 432 147 
Borrowes, B. p. (1900), 2 Ir. Bep. 

593.. 701 
Borthwick, B. p. (1779), 1 Doug. 

207.. 12, 16,812 
Bostock, B. p. (1893), 17 Cox, 700 217, 

917 918 
Boawell, B. p. (1842), C. 4 Mar. 584 ' 332 
Botflcld, B. r. (1841), C. 4 Mar. 151 1216, 

1221 
Botha, B. r. (1852), 1 Searle (Cape) 

149. • 947 
Bottoinley, B. p. (1893), Q. B. D. .' ! 329 

(1903), 115 L. T. 

J. 88. .324, 798 
Boucher, B. r. (1831), 4 C. 4 P. 562 312, 

1117 

(1841), 6 Jur. 709 . . 694 

Boughton, B. r. (1895), 2 Ir. Bep. 

386.. 128, 188 
BouU,B.r. (1848), 2 C. 4 K. 604 703,704 
Boulter, B. p. (1852), 2 Den. 396 . . 409, 

1061 

— r. Kent Justices (1897), 

App. Cas. 556. . 147 
Boulton, B. r. (1833), 5 C. & P. 637 61, 

639 



PACE 

Boulton, B. r. (1849), 1 Den. 508 . . 609, 

611 

(1871), 12 Cox, 87 . . 926, 

1288 
Bourdon, B. p. (1847), 2 C. <fc K. 366 360, 

362 
Bourke, B. p. (1900), 19 N. Z. L. B. 

335.. 200 

— v. Datis (1890), 44 Cb. D. 

110.. 1223 

— p. Mealy (1879), 14 Cox, 

329..1090n 
Bourne, B. v. (1831), 5 C. 4 P. 120 790, 

793 

— r. B. (1837), 7 A. 4 E. 58 289 
Boortzeff, B. r. (1898), 129 Cent 

Cr. Ct Sess. Pap. 284. .814, 1128 
Borden, B. r. (1843), 1 C. 4 K. 147 G43 
Bowen, B. r. (1840), 9 C. A P. 509 115, 

124 

(1841), C. & Mar. 149 841 

(1844), 1 Den. 22 . .82, 592, 

758, 754, 848 

(1844), 1 C. & K. 501 167 

(1846), 2 C. & K. 227 1170 

(1849), 18 Q.B. 790. .79, 596 

Bower, B. r. (1823). 1 B. <fe C. 585 1250 
Bowerman, B. p. (1891), 1 Q. B. 112 501, 

729 
Bowers, B. v. (1866), L. B. 1 C. C. B. 

41.. 567 
Bowes, B. i». (1787), 4 East, 171, cit. 307, 

1288 
Bowler, B. r. (1812), Coll. Lun. 673 25 

(1842), C. A Mar. 559 1081, 

1264 
Bowles, R. r. (1861), 2 F. A F. 371 1216 
Bowman, B. p. (1833), 6 C. A P. 

101, 337. . 173 
Bowray, B. p. (1846), 10 Jur. 211 . . 854, 

856 
Bowser, B. p. (1839), 8 Dowl. Pr. 

Cas. 128.. 1110 
Bowyer, B. p. (1831), 4 C. 4 P. 559 659, 

660, 679, 680, 681 
Box, B. r. (1816), B. & B. 300 . . 729 
Boxall.B. p. (1886), 4 A. 4 E. 513 131, 

134 
Boyall, B. p. (1759), 2 Burr. 832 . .4, 84, 

899 
Boyce, B. r. (1824), 1 Mood. 29. .303, 841, 

842 
Boyes, B. p. (1860), 2 F. A F. 157. . 1081 

(1861), IB. 4 S. 811.. 391, 

399,400 

Boyle, B. p. (1857), 7 Cox, 428 (/r.) 1114 

— p. Wiseman (1855), 10 Ex. 647 400 

Boynes, B. o. (1813), 1 C. & K. 65 1072, 

1074 
Brackenburr, B. p. (1893), 17 Cox, 

628.. 330 
Brackenridge, B. v. (1868), L. B. 

1 C. C. B. 138. . 765 
Bradford, B. r. (1840), 2 Cr. 4 Dix. 

(C. C. Ir.)41.. 961 
(1860), Bell, 268 . . C90 



Table of Cases. 



lyii 



321 

1250 



PACE 

Bradford r. Dawson (1897), 1 Q. B. 

307.. 1205 
Bradlangfa r. R. (1877-8), 2 Q. B. D. 

569; 8Q. B. D. 
607 .. 75,290,991, 

1192 

— R. p. (1882), 15 Cox, 156 10, 

120 

(1883), 15 Cox, 217 82, 

394, 592, 1022, 1 133 

(1883), 15 Cox, 

222n 385 
Bradlangb, Ex parte (1878), 3 

Q. B. D. 609. . 1192 

— r. Kewdigate (1883), 11 

Q.B. D. 1.. 1080 
Bradshaw r. Murphy (1836), 7 

C. A. P. 612.. 404 

— R. r. (1597), Poph. 122. . 943 

(1835), 7 C. * P. 

233.. 1114 

(1878), 14 Cox, 83 791, 

798 
Brain r. Preece (1843), 11 M. <fc W. 

773 

— R. r. (1832), 3 B. * Ad. 614* 
Braithwaite, R. r. (1859), 1 F. & P. 

638.. 1061 
Bramley, R. p. (1795), 6 T. R. 330 402 

( 1822), R. k R.478 . . 59, 

444 

(1861), L. 4c C. 21. . 455 

Brampton, R. p. (1808), 10 East, 

282. .1171, 1174 
Brangan, R. p. (1742), 1 Leach, 27 228 
Brannan, R. v. (1834), 6 C. A P. 

326.. 716 
BraaooD, R. p. (1880), 14 Cox, 894 891 
Brasier, R. r. (1777), 1 Leach, 199 319, 

388 
Bmm, R. v. (1862), 9 Cox, 284 . . 92 
Ban, R. p. (1843), 1 C. i K. 144 1178, 

1300 

Brav, R. p. (1862), 8 B. A S. 255 . . 9 

- (1862), 9 Cox, 218 . . 1062 

(1883), 15 Cox, 197 79, 840 

Braynell, R. p. (1850), 4 Cox, 404. . 537 
Brazier, R. p. (1899) (unrepoited). . 182 
Brazil, R. p. (1899), 63 J. P. 138 . . 898 
Breeonahire, R. p. (1849), 16 Q. B. 

813. .1236, 1242 

Bren, R. r. (1868), L. A C. 346 .. 564 

Brenan,R.P.(1854),6Cox,S81(/r.) 1114 
Breoton, R. p. (1890), 111 Cent. Cr. 

Ct. Seas. Pap. 809 .. 890 

Brett p. Beiles (1829), M. & M. 416 346 

— Ex parte, Re Hodgson (1875), 

lCh.D. 151. .1146, 1147 
Brewer, R. r. (1834), 6 C. A P. 363 401, 

711 

(1863), 9 Cox, 409 . . 422 

Brewster r. Sewell (1820), 8 B. & 

Aid. 296.. 380 
Brice, R. r. (1821), R. & R. 450. .682, 633, 

634 

(1824), 2 B. * Aid. 606 207 



PAGE 

Bridekirk, R. r. (1809), 11 East, 304 1228 

Bridges, R. r. (1845), 1 Cox, 261 . . 628 
Bridgraan, R. r. (1841), C. 4c Mar. 

271.. 124 
Bridgwater Trustee* r. Bootle 

(1866), L. R. 2 Q. B. 4. . 1222 
Bridgwater p. Bythway (1688), 8 

Lev. 113.. 838 

- R. p. (1905), 1 K. B. 131 395 
Brier, R. r. (1850), 14 Q. B. 668 . . 131 
Briggs, R. r. (1831), 1 Mood. 818. . 805, 

817, 840, 841 

(1866), Dears. & B. 98 1 179 

Brightside Bierlow, R. p. (1849), 

13 Q. B. 933. . 1225 
Brimilow, R. r. (1840), 9 C. A P. 

366. .22, 23, 908 
Brinklett, R. p. (1828), 3 C. 4c P. 

416. . 57 
Brinkley p. Att.-Gen. (1890), 15 

P. D. 76. .354, 1173 
Brisac, R. r. (1803), 4 East, 164 44, 1285, 

1287 1288 
Brisby, R. r. (1849), 1 Den. 416. .5*, 1088 
Bristow r. Seqaeville (1850), 6 Ex. 

275 347 

— R. p. (1795), 6 T. R. 168 ! ! 257 
Brittain, R. p. (1848), 8 Cox, 76 . . 1288 
Brittieton, R. p. (1881), 12 Q. B. D. 

266. . 397 
Britton, R. r. (1833), lM.dk Rob. 

297 829 

(1898), 17 Cox, 627 " 1060, 

1067 
Broad p. Pitt (1828), 8 C. & P. 518 402 
Broadfoot, R. p. (1743), Fost 154. . 808 
Brodribb, R. p. (1816), 6 C. & P. 

571.. 1002, 1098 
Bromage p. Prosser (1825), 4 B. & C. 

247. .843, 662, 993, 1123 
Brompton County Court, Judge of, 

R. p. (1898), 2 Q. B. 195. . 1097 
Brook r. Brook (1857), 9 H. L. C. 

193.. 1176 
Brooke & Fremlin, lie (1898), 1 Ch. 

647.. 773 
Brooke, R. p. (1788), 2 T. R. 190. .147, 161 

(1819), 2 Stark. (N. P.) 

472. . 419 

(1856), 7 Cox, 251 !!ll23, 

1129 

(1894), 69 J. P. 6 .. 117 

Brookes, R. p. (1842). C. 6 Mar. 

643. .216, 299, 631 

— r. Tichborne (1850), 5 Ex. 

929 883m 
Brooks, R. r. (1829), 4 C. A P. 131 439 

(1838), 8 C. & P. 295 454 

1848), 1 Cox, 6 . . 322 
1847), 1 Den. 217 .. 9/ 
1853), Dears. 184 . . 82 

Brooks p. Bagshaw (1904), 2 K. B. 

798. .94, 1165 

— r. Mason (1902), 2 K. B. 742 85 

— r. Warwick (1818), 2 Stark. 

(X. P.) 389. .720, 760 



Wiii 



Table of Cases. 



PAGE 

Broome, R. r. (1848), 17 L. J. (Q. B.) 

206.. 284 

— r. R. (1848), 12 Q. B. 884 36 

— R. r.(1851),18L.T.(O.S.) 

19. .111, 1091 
Broogh v. Perkins (1708). 6 Mod. 

81 . • 298 
Broughton r. Wilkerson (1880), 44 

J. P. 781. .862, 884 

- R. r. (1771), 5 Burr. 

2700.. 1226 
Brown v. Att-Gen. forN.Z. (1898), 

App. Cm. 284. . 31 

— r. Crashaw (1614), 2 Bulstr. 

164.. 205 

— r. Croome (1817), 2 Stark. 

(N. P.) 297. . 1182 

— v. Foot (1892), 61 L. J. (M. 

C.UIO. . 35 

— r. Patch (1899), 1 Q. B. 892 1204 

— r. Woodman (1834), 6 C. 

A P. 206. . 368 

— R. r. (1674), 1 Vent. 243 . . 898 

(1776), 1 Leach, 148 . . 790, 

799 

(1780), 2 East, P. C. 

731.. 524 

(1787), 2 East, P. C. 

501. . 626 

(1799), 2 East, P. C. 

487.. 632 

(1800), 2 East, P. C. 

1007.. 770 

(1817), R. A R. 82m . . 513 

(1828), M. A M. 163 67, 298, 

1017 

(1831), 4 C. A P. 588n 414 

■ (1841), C. A Mar. 314 864, 

1101 

(1848), 1 Den. 291. .166, 751, 



(1848), 17L.J. (M.C.) 

145 . . 186, 826 
(1856), Dears. 616 .. 454 
(1857), 8 Cox, 69 . . 1284 
(1858), 7 Cox, 442. .143, 401, 
590, 1280, 1290 
(1858), Q.B.Feb... 143, 291 
(I860), 2 F. A F. 559.. 721 
(1863), 8 F. A F. 821.. 667 
(1863), 9 Cox, 281 . . 401 
(1867), L.R.I C.C. R. 

70.. 404 
(1870), L. R. 1 C.C. R. 

244.. 825 
(1878), 14 Cox, 144 16,1804 
(1883), 10Q.B. D.881 821, 

823, 848 
(1890), 24 Q. B. D. 357 8, 
276, 464, 924, 1296 
(1895), 1 Q. B. 119 10, 1206 
(1898), 19 Cox, 33 . . 266 
(1899), 68 J. P. 790 .. 829, 

1294 1296 
(1902), 65 ,T. P. 136 ..' 1815 
(1903), 68 J. P. Rep. 16 831 



I 



PACK 

Browne, R. r. (1829), M. A M. 815 1060 

(1842), 6 Jar. 168 . . 188 

(1846), 18 Q.B. 654 1232 

Browne r. Camming (1829), 10 B. 

AC. 70.. 228 

— r. Dawson (1840), 12 A. A 

E. 624.. 1111 
Browning, R. r. (1690), 1 East, P. C. 

812.. 812 

(1849), 3 Cox, 437 1075 

Brownlow, R. r. (1839), 11 A. A E. 

119.. 122 

(1878), 14 Cox, 216 676 

Brace, R. r. (1812), R. A R. 248 .. 89 

(1847), 2 Cox, 262 . . 798 

Brumby, R. r. (1851), 3 C. A K. 315 491 

Brummit, R. r. (1861). L. A C 9 . . 497 

Brunei v. Moore (1904), 1 Ch. 805. . 1101 

Brunswick, R. r. (1824), 1 Mood. 26 60 

Brunton, R. r. (1821), R. A R. 454 890 
Bryan, R. r. (1857), Dears. A B. 

266.. 608 

(1861), 2 F. A F. 667.. 618 

Bryant, Re (1863), 27 J. P. 277, 289 1089, 

1091 

— R. v. (1898), 68 J. P. 876 . . 1149 
Bubb, R. v. (1851), 4 Cox, 466. . 102, 803 
Buchanan r. Hardy (1887), 18 Q.B. 

D. 486.. 874 

- R. r. (1846), 8 Q. B. 883 4 

(1898), 12 Manitoba, 

190.. 99 
Buck. R. r. (1726), 2 Str. 679 . . 4 
Buckland, R. r. (1865), 6 B. A S. 

897.. 1235 
Buckler, R. r. (1878), 13 Cox, 

293. .809, 821 
Bucklngh (Duchess), R.r. (1704), 1 

Salk. 868. . 1228 
Buckmaster, R. r. (1888), 20 Q. B. 

D. 182. .460, 452 
Bucknell, R. r. (1702), 7 Mod. 56. . 1227 
Buckner, Protector r. (1655), Sty. 

467.. 798 
Bucks, R. r. (1810), 12 East, 192 . . 1285 
Budd r. Lucas (1891), 1 Q. B. 408 1151 
Budge r. Parsons (1863), 8 B. A 8. 

382. . 1258 
Bulbrook r. Goodere (1765), 8 Burr. 

1768. . 1181 
Bull, R. r. (1797), 2 Leach, 841, cit. 462 
(1889), 9 C. A P. 22. .414, 796 
(1846), 1 Cox, 187 . . 65 
(1845), lCox, 281 ..12,17 
~ 788 

869 
598 
178 
100 



(1860), 2 F. A F. 201 
(1871), 12 Cox, 31 
(1877), 18 Cox. 608 



Bull r. Tilt (1798), 1 B. A P. 199. . 
Bollard, R. r. (1872), 12 Cox, 868 
Bullivant v. Att-Gen. for Victoria 

(1901), App. Cas. 196. . 401 
Bullock r. Dodds (1819), 2B. A Aid. 

268. .178, 238 

— r. Dunlap (1876), 2 Ex. D. 48 267 

— R. r. (1826), 1 Mood. 324* 68, 

216, 299 



TaJbh of Ccue$. 



lix 



taox 
Bollock, E. r. (1866), Dean. 668 . . 1286 

(1868), L fi. 1 C. C. 

R.115.. 698 
Buhner, B. r. (1864), L. 4 C. 476. . 610, 

615 
Bunee, K. r. (1858), 1 F. 4 F. 523 452 
Bunkall, R. v. (1864), L. 4 C. 871 467 
Bonn, B. r. (1872), 12 Cox, 816 . . 1158, 

1169, 1278 
Banner, B. r. (1894), 6 Queensland 

L.J. 80., 801 
Bants, B, r. (1788), 2 T. R. 688 .. 227 
Banyan, R. r. (1844), 1 Cox, 74 1189n 
Burhage, R. r. (1768), 8 Barr. 1440 412 
Burbon, R. r. (1816), 1 M. 4 G. 892 171 
Boreh, R. r. (1866), 4 F. 4 F. 407 92, 

690, 1280 
Borden, In re, Ex parte Wood 

(1888), 21 Q. B. D. 24. . 1187 
Burdetr, R. r. (1697), 1 Ld. Raym. 

148. .804, 1084 

(1820), 1 St Tr. (N. 

S.) 1. .44, 143, 807, 315, 
989, 990, 991, 992, 997 

(1866), Dears. 431 .. 211, 

419 
Burden r. Rickets (1809), 2 Camp. 

121».. 816 
Burgess, R. r. (1668), Kel. (J.) 27 629 

(1862), L. * C. 268 8, 128, 

828 

(1868), L. 4 C. 299 62, 444 

(1886), 16 Q. B. D. 

141. .1088, 1093 
Burgess r. Boetefenr (1344), 7 M. 

4G. 481.. 280, 243 
Btrrgon, R. r. (1866), Dean. 4 B. 

11. .602, 608 
Burke, R. r. (1822), R. 4 R. 496 . . 730 
[1868), 8 Cox, 44 (/r.) 404 
[1867), 10 Cox, 519 . . 201, 
938 941 942 
Borkttt, R. r. (1738), Andr. 280 . . ' 120 
Hurler, R. r. (1818), 1 Phil. Ev. 

(7th ed.) 111. .832, 884 
Burnand r. Nerot (1824), 1 C. 4 P. 

578.. 316 
Burnbr, Ex parte (1901), 2 K. B. 

468.. 1196,1200 
— R. r. (1843), 6 Q. B. 29 .. 121 
Burnett, R. r. (1815), 4 M. 4 Sel. 

272.. 1188 
Burn r. Farrar (1819), 2 Hsgg. 

Consist. Rep. 369 . . 1174 
Burns, R. r. (1886), 16 Cox, 865 .. 990, 

998,999,1099 
-— (1887), 16 Cox, 195 . . 212 
Burns r. Nowcll (1880), 5 Q. B. D. 

444.. 83 
Barnsides, R. r. (1860), Bell, 282 ! ! 699 
Burr r. Harper (1816), Holt (N. P.) 

420.. 882 
Barnston, R. v. (1840), 4 Jur. 697 1056 
Barrel!, R. r. (1868), L. 4 C. 864 . . 278, 

898 
(1867), 10 Cox, 462. . 1218 



PACK 

Borridge, R. r. (1736), 8 P. Wm#. 

489. .19, 220, 1087, 1808 

(1840), 2 M. 4 Rob. 

296. .1116, 1117 
Burrongh, R. r. (1677), 1 Vent. 806 74 

- v. Martin (1809), 2 Camp. 

112.. 418 

Barrow, R. v. (1823), 1 Lewin, 75. . 29 

Burrowes, R. v. (1880), 1 Mood. 274 627 

Burrows, R. v. (1823), R. 4 R. 529 911 

(1869), 11 Cox, 258 699 

Burt, R. v. (1861), 5 Cox, 284 .. 416 

(1870), 11 Cox, 399 . . 1217 

Burt v. Burt (I860), 29 L. J. (Matr.) 

188 . . 1174 
Burton v. Pinkerton (1867), L. R. 2 

Ex.340.. 958 

— r. Plummer (1834), 2 A. 4 

E.841.. 419 

— R. v. (1721), 1 Str. 481 . . 804 

(1829), 1 Mood. 237.. 664 

(1864), Dears. 282. .841, 485 

(1868), 8 F. 4 F. 772. .27, 28 

(1877), 18 Cox, 71 .. 7, 

16, 597, 1800 

(1886), 16 Cox, 62 . . 613 

Bury St. Edmunds (Mayor, etc.) r. 

West Suffolk County Council 

(1898), 2 Q. B. 246. . 1240 
Bush, R. v. (1818), R. 4 R. 872 . . 301 » 

— v. Railing (1766), Say. 289. . 390 
Bushell, R. v. (1888), 16 Cox, 867. . 248 
Butcher, R. r. (1783), 2 East, P. C. 

668.. 336 

(1796), Peake, 226 

(8rded.) 110 

(1889), 2 M. 4 Rob. 

228.. 211 

(1858), Bell, 6 . . 12, 608 

(1900), 64 J. P. 808. . 370, 

376 
Butler r. Gregory (1902), 18 T. L. R. 

870. .886, 889 

— v. Moore (1802), McNally 

Ev. 268.. 402 

— R. r. (1834), 6 C. 4 P. 868 . . 3 

(1846), 2 C. 4 K. 221.. 808 

(1881), 14 Cox, 580 (Jr.) Ill 

(1897), 18 N. S. W. Rep. 

(Law) 146.. 187 
Butt, R. r. (1884), 15 Cox, 664. . 12, 692 
Butterfield, R. p. (1848), 1 Cox, 89 1807 

(1898), 17 Cox, 598 1114 

Butterwick, R. v. (1889), 2 M. 4 

Rob. 196.. 248, 780 
Buttenrorth, R. r. (1823), R. 4 R. 

520. .87, 141, 218, 686 

(1871), 12 Cox, 

132.. 444 
Buttery, R. tv (1818), R. 4 R. 342 366, 

726 

(1820), 4 B. 4 Aid. 

179, ctt. . . 609 
Buttle, R. v. (1870), L. R. 1 C. C. R. 

248.. 880 
Button, R. v. (1838), 8 C. 4 P. 660 835 



lx 



Table of Cases. 



1*AGK 

Button, R. r. (1848), 11 Q. B. 929. . 1289 

(1900), 2 Q. B. 597 . . 614 

Buxton r. Home (1690), 1 Show. 

(K. B.) 174 . . 895 
Bykerdike, K. r. (1832), 1 M. <fc 

Rob. 179. .217, 1168 
Byrne, R. v. (1798), 27 St. Tr. 455 946 

(1852), 6 Cox, 476 (/r.) 964 



Byron (Lord), R. r. (1765), 19 St. 

Tr. 1177 . . 



CABBAGE, R. r. (1815), R. * R. 

292 
Cadman, R. r. (1825), 1 Mood. 114* 



789 



442 
816 
827 
62 



817 
988 
437 

893 



Cain, R. r. (1841), C. <k Mar. 309 . . 
Caldicott, Ex parte, Re Mapleback 

(1878), 4 Q. B. 1). 150 . . 1090m 
Calc, R. r. (1824), 1 Mood. 11 . . 5 
( allahan, R. r. ( 1837), 8 C. A P. 154 562 
t'allaii, R. r. (1809), R. <fc R. 157 . . 632 
Callanan, R. r. (1826), 6 B. A C. 102 75, 

1045, 1064 
Calthropr.Axtel(1686),3Mod.l68 901 
Calvert, R. p. (1848), 3 C. A K. 201 
Calvin's Case (1608), 7 Co. Rep. 1. . 
Calye's Case (1584), 8 Co. Rep. 33. . 
Cameron r. Ligbtfoot (1778), 2 W. 

Bl. 1190.. 

p. Wiggins (1901), 1 K. B. 

1.. 1153 
Camfield, R.r. (1824), 1 Mood. 42.. 629 
Caminada p. Hulton (1891), 17 Cox, 

807.. 1207 
Campbell, R. r. (1792), 2 Leach, 642 643 

(1827), 1 Mood. 179 450 

(1843), 1 C. A K. 82 67 

Campbell r. R. (1848), 11 Q. B. 799, 

814. .88, 89, 91, 230, 231, 
295, 648, 710, 840 

— R. r. (1869), 11 Cox, 323 805 

— lie (1884), 14 Q. B. U. 32 1089» 
Campion, R. r. (1580), Savile, 3 . . 939 
Camplin, R. r. (1845), 1 Den. 89 . . 908 
Canadian Pacific Rail. Co. p. Parke 

(1899), App. Cas. 535 . . 1185 
Cannan p. Abingdon (Earl) (1900), 

2 Q. B. 66 . . 855 
Canniff, R. r. (1840), 9 C. A P. 359 791 
Cannon, R. r. (1809), R. A R. 146. . 525 

— r. Rands (1870), 11 Cox, 631 

1090m 
Cant, R. r. (1842), C. A Mar. 521 . . 1088 
Canterbury (Archbishop of), R. r. 

(1902), 2K. B. 572.. 144 
Capewell, R. r. (1833), 5 C. A P. 

549.. 1248 
Capital and Counties Bank r. Henty 

(1880), 5 C. P. D. 589.. 1118 
Carden, R. r. (1879), 6 Q. B. D. 1. . 1120 
Cardigan (Earl), R. r. (1841), 4 JSt. 

Tr. (N. S.) 601. .56, 182, 800 
Carcir, R. r. (1616), 1 Rolle Rep. 

407 . . 102 



PAGE 

Carew, Ex parte (1897), App. Cas. 

719 279 
Carev, R. r. (187'J), 14 Cox, 214 ! ! 810, 

864 
— r. Pitt (1797), Peake, Add. 

Cas. 130. .883, 715 
Carlile (Mary), R. r. (1821), 1 St. 

Tr. (N. S.) 1033. .148, 1020, 1021, 

1022 1023 
Carlile (Richard), R. r. (1819), 1 St.' 

Tr. (N. S.) 1387. .1020, 1022 

(1819), 3 B. 

A Aid. 161. .4, 1020,1022 

(1819), 4 St. 

Tr. (N. S.) 1423. .1020, 1022 

(1831), 2 St. 

Tr. (X. S.)459;2B.A 

Ad. 362, 971 . . 281, 284 
Carlile (L.) (1834), 6 C. A P. 686. . 1181, 

1216 
Carlisle, R. r. (1854), Dears. 337 . . 1280 
Carleton r. Brightwell (1728), 2 P. 

Wms. 462.. 439 
Carmarthen (Mayor), r. Evans (1842), 

10 M. 4W. 274.. 202 
Carney, R. r. (1832), 1 Mood. 351 . . 738 
Carpenter, R. r. (1866), L. R. 1 C. 

C. R. 29.. 662 
Carr, R. v. (1811), R. 4 R. 198 . . 565 

(1819), R. A R. 877. . 818, 820 

(1832), 8 C. A P. 163 . . 805 

(1867), 10 Cox, 564 . . 1064 

(1882), 10 Q. B. D. 76 . . 40, 

41,540 
Carr r. Anderson (1903), 1 Ch. 90 ; 

2Ch. 279.. 244 

Carrell, R. v. (1782), 1 Leach, 287. . 680 

Carroll, R. v. (1825), 1 Mood. 89 . . 643 

(1835), 7 C. A P. 145 29 

Carrnthers, R. r. (1844), 1 Cox, 

138.. 533 
Carson, R. r. (1815), R. A R. 303 . . 804, 

560 
Carter, R. p. (1774), 1 Cowp. 220 . . 22 

(1800), 2 East, P. C. 

985.. 88 

(1843), 1 C. A K. 173. . 641 

(1845), 1 Den. 65 . . 856, 

719 736 

(1867), 10 Cox, 642 . . ' 604 

(1876), 13 Cox, 220 . . 155 

(1884), 12Q.B.D.522 552 

Cartwright r. Green (1802), 2 Leach, 

952.. 446 

- R.r. (1806),R.«feR.107n 3 
Caruchet, Re (1899), 9 Queensland 

L. J. 122 . , 37 

CasboU, R. v. (1869), 11 Cox, 385. . 97 

Cnse, R. p. (1795), 1 Leach, 154 . . 966 

(I860), 1 Den. 580 . . 834, 

909 920 
Casey r. R. (1874), Ir. Rep. 8 C. L. % ' 

408.. 1102 
Caspar r. R. (1839), 9 C. A P. 289. . 1803 
Cass, R. r. (1784), 1 Leach, 293m . . 831 
Cassano, R. r. (1805), 5 Esp. 281 . . 1081 



Table of Case*. 



Ill 



TAGS 



Casaidy, R. r. (1858), 1 F. <fc F. 79. . 415 
Castle, R. r. (1628), Cro. Jac. 644. . 4 

(1867), Dears. A B. 363 757 

Castle Morton, R. r. (1820), 3 B. & 

AM.688.. 386 
Castrique r. Imrie (1870), L. B. 4 

11. L. 414. .347, 365 
Castro r. Murray (1865), L. R. 10 

Ex.213.. 288 

— (alias Ortoo), R. v. (1873), 

Q. B. . . 186 

— R. r. (1874), L R. 9 Q. B. 

350. .138, 139. 213, 214, 1059 
Castro r. R. (1881, 3). 6 App. Gas. 

229 ; 5 Q. B. D. 490 . . 86, 86, 
88, 91, 92, 223, 231, 232, 237, 
290, 1051, 1059 
Cate and Tarn', R. r. (1887), Q. B. 

D.7.. 143 
Cttesbv, R. r. (1824), 2B.&C. 

814.. 844 
Calkenll, R. r. (1875), 13 Cox, 109 216, 

219, 914, 915 
< atherirood r. Caslon (1844), 13 M. 

cW. 261.. 1174 
Cator, R. r. (1802), 4 Esp. 117 ..883, 

715 

— r. Hamilton (1889), 53 J. P. 

504.. 852 
Catterall r. GattenJl (1845), 1 Rob. 

Eccl. 304 ; 3 Rob. Eocl. 580 . . 1174 
Caodwell, R. r. (1851), 17 Q. B. 503 298 
Cavan r. Stewart (1816), 1 Stark. 

(N. P.) 525.. 379 
Carey r. Leadbetter (1868), 18 C. B. 

(N. S.) 470. . 1185 
Cavendish, R. v. (1873), Ir. Rep. 

8C.L.178.. 781 
Cawley, R. r. (1896), 7 Queensland 

L. J. 45 . . 66» 
Central Criminal Conit Justices, 

R. 9. (1883), 11 Q. B. D. 479 . . 269 
Central Criminal Court Justices, 
R. r. (1886-7), 17 Q. B. D. 598 ; 

18 Q. B. D. 314.. 270 
Central Wingland, R. v. (1877), 2 

Q. B. D. 349 . . 1288 
Chadwick,R.r.(1833) 9 6C.&P.181 610 

(1844), 2 M. A Rob. 

545.. 714 

(1847), 11 Q. B. 173 

281, 1176 

(1850), M. S. . .18, 1303 

Chalking, R. r. (1817), R. A R. 834 645 
Chalkier, R. r. (1813), R. A R. 268 79, 

693 
Chalmers, R. r. (1867), 10 Cox, 450 533, 

534 
— r. Payne (1835), 2 Cr. M. 

at R. 156.. 996 
Chamberlain, R. r. (1826), 1 Mood. 

154.. 304 

(1833), 6 CAP. 

93.. 173 

(1867), 10 Cox, 

486.. 788 



PAOK 

Chamberlayne, R. r. (1559) . . 946 

Chambers r. tfernasconi (1834), 1 

Cr. M. A R. 347, 368 821 

— R. r. (1848), 3 Cox, 92 . . 425 

(1871), L. R. 1 C. 

C. R. 341. . 737 

(1896), 18Cox, 401 72, 

471, 490, 1152, 1162, 1188, 

1196, 1201, 1208 
Chambers's Case (1738), Andr. 353 125 In 
Champney, R. r. (1836), 2 Lew in, 

258 . . 1061 
Champneys, R. r. (1837), 2 M. A 

Rob. 26.. 172 
Chandler, R. r. (1855), Dears. 453 2, 

784 886 
— r. Home (1842), 2 M. A ' 

Rob. 423.. 414 
Chandra Dharma, R. r. (1905), 21 

T. L. R. 853.. 913 
Chapman, Ex parte (1836), 4 A. A 

E. 773 . . 147, 1097 

— r. Milvain (1850), 5 Ex. 

61 . . 62 

— R. r. (1838), 8 C. & P. 

558.. Ill, 115, 123, 124, 

418 

(1843), 1 C. & K. 

119 . . 673 

(1849), 1 Den. 432 2, 

280, 1044, 1071 

(1871), 12 Cox, 4 810, 

864 
Chappel, R. r. (1834), 1 M. A Rob. 

895.. 387 
Chappie, R. r. (1804), R. 4 R. 77 . . 698 

(1811), 3 Camp. 91 1252» 

( 1840), 9 C. A p. 855 20, 

1807 

(1892), 17 Cox, 455 122 

Chard, R. v. (1822), R. ft R. 488 . . 74 
Charles, R. r. (1861), L. & C. 90 . . 1197, 

1200 

(1892), 17 Cox, 499. . 669, 

1288 
Charlesworth, R. r. (1851), 16 Q. B. 

1012.. 1217, 1220 

(1860), 2 F. 4 

F. 826 . . 226, 895 

(1861), 1 B. & 

S. 460 . . 148, 161, 
224, 225 
Charlewood, R. v. (1786), 1 Leach, 

409 . . 454 
Charnock, R. r. (1698), 12 St. Tr. 

1877 . . 297, 939, 940 

- r. Court (1899), 2 Ch. 85 1162 

- r. Merchant (1900), 1 Q. 

B. 474 . . 392n, 893, 399, 891 
Chart and Longbridge, R. r. (1870), 

L. R. 1 C. C. R. 237 . . 1239, 1242 
Chatburn, R. r. (1838), 1 Mood. 408 779 
Chater, R. r. (1861), 9 Cox, 1 . . 661 
Chcafor, R. r. (1851), 2 Den. 361 . . 439 
Ched worth, R. r. (1840), 9 C. A P. 

285.. 1234 



lxii 



Table of Case*. 



PACK 

Cbeere, R. r. (1825), 4 B. A C. 902 70, 

858,1026 
Cheeseraan, R. v. (1836). 7 C. & P. 

465.. 796 

(1862), L. ft C. 

140 . . 8, 464, 1296 
Chelsea Waterworks v. Cowper 

(1795), 1 Eap. 275 . . 881 
Cherry, R. p. (1781), 2 East, P. C. 

656 • • 464 

(1871), 12 Cox, 82 ! .' 828, 

1146 
Chetwynd, R. r. (1748), 18 St. Tr. 

289.. 794 
Cheverton, R. r. (1862), 2 F. 4 F. 

888.. 781 
Chichester r. Hill (1883), 52 L. J. 

(Q. B.) 150 .. 268, 269 

— r. Philips (1680), Sir T. 

Rayni. 404-406 . . 865 

— R. r. (1851), 2 Den. 458 227 

(1851), 17 Q. B. 

504n.. 248 
Chidley, R. r. (1860), 8 Cox, 865 . . 828 
Child, R. r. (1830), 4 C. A P. 442. . 1107 

(1846), 2 Cox, 102 ..1110, 

1111 

(1851), 6 Cox, 197 ..1060 

(1871), L. R. ICC. R. 

807.. 651, 658 
Chipchasp, R. r. (1795), 1 East, P. 

C. 567.. 461 
Chisholm, R. v. (1816), R. ft R. 297 729 

- v. Doulton (1889), 22 Q. 

B. D. 786. .83, 1186, 1220 
Chittenden, R. v. (1885), 15 Cox, 725 1217 
Cholmley, R. r. (1686). Cro. Car. 

464.. 102 
Chorley, R. r. (1848), 12 Q. B. 516 292, 

1223 
Chowne r. Baylis (1862), 81 L. J. 

(Ch.)767.. 264 
Christian, R, v. (1842), C. ft Mar. 

888 . . 52, 845, 1064 

(1842), 12 L. J. 

(M. C.)26.. 671 

(1878), LR.2C. 

C. a 94.. 576 

(1898), 83 L. J, N. 

587 . . 1045 
Christie, R. r. (1821), Carr. Supp. 

202.. 821 

(1858), 7 Cox, 606 . . 212» 

Christie r. Cooper (1900), 2 Q. B. 

522.. 85, 1152 
— v. Davey (1898), 1 Ch. 316 1184 
Christopher, R. r. (1850), 1 Den. 

586.. 423 

(1868), Bell, 27 445 

Chubb r. Weatley (1884), 6 C. 4 P. 

486.. 993 
— R. r. (1831), 2 Deac. Cr. L. 

1517, 1518 . . 676 

Chug*, R. v , (1870), 11 Cox, 658 . . 1047 
Church, Ex parte (1822), 1D.4R. 

324.. 355 



FAGS 

Clapham, R. v. (1829), 4 C. A P. 29 821 
Clapton, R. v. (1848), 8 Cox, 126 . . 661 
Clarence, R. r. (1889), 22 Q. B. D. 

28 .. 885, 845, 908 
Clark, R. r. (1810), R. 4c R. 181 . . 501 

(1818), R. ft R. 858 .. 56 

(1818), 1 Mood. 376m. . 459 

(1820), 1 B. ft B. 478. . 170 

(1844), 5 Q. B. 87 . . 1284 

(1858), Dean. 196 '. . 1318 

(1859), 7 W. R. 601 . . 282 

(1866), L. R. 1 C. C. R. 

54.. 276 

(1883), 15 Cox, 171 . . 825, 

1191, 1208 
Clark r. Molyneax (1877), 8 Q. B. 

D. 287 . . 1132 
Clarke, R. v. (1613), 1 Bulstr. 203. . 67 

(1787), 1 T. R. 679 . . 1252« 

(1817), 2 Stark. (N. P.) 

241 . . 812, 319, 910 

(1844), lC.ftK. 421 624,634 

(1854), Dears. 397 .. 909 

(1859), 1 P. ft F. 654 1263 

(1866), 4 F. ft F. 1040 823 

(1867), 10 Cox, 474 . . 1175 

(1895), 59 J. P. 248 . . 10, 

597, 922 

(1900), 2 Ir. Rep. 304 1255, 

1267, 1272 

(1905), Cent. Crim. Ct. 574 

Clarke r. Newsam (1847). 1 Ex. 181 739 

— r. Saffery (1824), Ry. ft M. 

126.. 418 

— v. Periam (1742), 2 Atk. 837 119? 
Clarkson, R. v. (1892), 17 Cox, 483 1098, 

1099, 1100 
Claxby, R. v. (1863), 24 L. J. (Q. B.) 

228.. 1211 
Clay, R. v. (1819), R. ft R. 387 . . 470 
Claybnrn, R. r. (1818), R. ft R. 860 645 
Clayton, R. r. (1848), 1 C. ft K. 128 16, 

1810 
Cleary v. Booth (1893), 1 Q. B. 465 795, 

886 

— R. o. (1862), 2 F. ft F. 850. . 822 
Clegg, R. v. (1848), 8 Cox, 295 . . 678 

(1868), 19 L. T. 47 . . 1044 

(1869), Ir. Rep. 8 C. L. 

166.. 457 
Cleland, R. r. (1901), 20 N. Z. L. R. 

509.. 409, 1061m 
Clemens, R. v. (1898), 1 Q. B. 556 671, 

677, 698, 701 
Clement r. Fisher (1827), 7 B. ft C. 

459.. 1180 
Clements, R. r. (1851), 2 Den. 251 100 
Clendon, R. v. (1731), 2 Str. 870, 

911 . . 82, 1022 
Clerk r. R, (1702), cm. temp. Holt 

(N.P.), 167 . . 1208m 

(1861), 9H.LC. 184 . . 188 

Clerk of Assise of Oxford Circuit, 

R. v. (1897), 1 Q. B. 870 . . 158, 159, 1186 
Clewes, R. r. (1880), 4 C. ft P. 228 309, 

832, 834, 838 



Table of Cases. 



lxiii 



PAGE 

Clevef v. Bsthnrst (1734), 2 Str. 

CHbniii, R. r. (1896), 62 J. P. 232 " 416 
Clifford, a r. (1945), 2 C. * K. 202 12 

(1895), 16 N. S. W. 

Rep. Law, 12.. 126 
Clifton, R. r. (1794), 5 T. R. 498 . . 1222 
diocb, R. r. (1791), 2 East, P. C. 

988 . . 785, 736 
Clinton, R. r. (1869), Ir. Rep. 4 C. 

L.6.. 436 
Cliviger, R. r. (1788), 2 T. R. 263. . 398 
dees, R. r. (1858), Deais. * B. 460 619, 

620, 703, 704 
CMer, R. r. (1859), 8 Cox, 237 . . 186 
Onbb r. Hntaon (1865), 18 C. B. 

(N. S.)414..10S9n 
Onbe, R. r. (1857), 8 Jar. (N. S.) 

698.. 317 
Ctaderar, R. r. (1849), 1 Den. 514 816 
dideroT, R. r. (1849), 3C.4K. 

205.. 278 
a«ttoo r. Attenboronffh (1895), 

2 Q. B. 707. . 730 
drncanTi Owe (1599), Cro. Eliz. 

654. . 101 
Coalheavtn* Case (1768), 1 Leacb, 

64. .12, 1299 

Csate*, R. r. (1834), 6 C. 4 P. 894 819 

— r. Birch (1841), 2 Q. B. 252 401 

Cobbett, R.r. (1804), 29 Sk.Tr. 1,49 990 

(1831), 2 St. Tr. (N. 

S.) 789, 903. .223, 989, 991 
Cobbett r. Hudson (1852), 1 E. i B. 

14.. 414 
Cebden, R. v. (1862), 3 F. & F. 833 308 
Cochlan r. Williamson (1779), 

1 Dong. 93. . 881 
Cochrane (Lord), R. r. (1814), 

3 M. A Sel. 10a. . 293 
Cock, R. r. (1815), 4 M. & Sel. 71 1016 
Ceekbnrn, R. r. (1849), 3 Cox, 543 912 

(1857), Dean. & B. 

203.. 369 
Cockeroft, R. r. Tayl. Med. Jnrisp. 

788. • 27 

(1870), 11 Cox, 410 812, 

910 
Cockeroft r. Smith (1706), 2 Salk. 

642.. 837 
Cockshott, R. r. (1898), 1 Q. B. 582 6, 

1152, 1328 
Codd r. Cabe (1876), 1 Ex. D. 352 810, 

864,898 
CedringUm, R. r. (1825), 1 C. * P. 

661.. 601 
Coe, R. r. (1834), 6 C. & P. 403 .. 827 
Coelbo, R. v. (1861), 9 Cox, 8 . . 737 
Cogens, R. v. (1873), 12 Cox, 517 551 
Csghlan, R. r. (1865), 4F.4F. 816 589, 

1128 
Cobcn, R. r. (1816), 1 Stark. (K. P.) 

611.. 1046 

(1851), 2 Den. 249 . . 451 

(1858), 8 Cox, 41 . . 1010 

(J868), 11 Cox, 99 . . 81 



HACK 



Coke, Woodbuni <fe, R. r. (1722), 16 

St. Tr. 753.. 842 
(And tee Woodburn's Cave.) 
Coldongb, R. r. (1882), 15 Cos, 

92 (/r.). .812, 721 
Cole v. Pendleton (1896), 60 J. P. 

859. .886, 890 

— r. Turner (1705), 6 Mod. 149. . 836 

— R. r. (1810), 3 Roat. Cr. (6th 

ed.) 251. .306, 924 

(1813), 8 Camp. 371. .158, 824 

(1902), 8 Ont L. R. 389 1071 

Coleman, R. v. (1785), 2 East, P. C. 

672. .447, 598 
Coles, R. p. (1887), 16 Cox, 165 . . 1053, 

1063 
Cole?, R. r. (1868), 10 Cox, 536 .. 835 

(1887), 16 Cox, 226 . . 562 

College of Christ (Brecon) A Martin, 

Re (1877), 8 Q. B. D. 16. . 149 
Collet, R. v. (1823), R. A R. 498 . . 628 
Colley, R. r. (1829), M. A M. 329. . 414 
Collieott, R. 9. (1812), R. A R. 212, 

229. .717, 760 
Collier, R. r. (1881), 6 C. 4c P. 160 703 
Colling, R. r. (1817), 2 Cox, 184 121, 139 
Collins r. Blaotern, (1 Smith, L. C. 

(11th ed.) 869. .1089a 

— r. Carnegie (1834), 1 A. 4 E. 

695. .856, 1131 

— r. Thomas (1859), 1 F. A F. 

416.. 11 U 

— R. r. (1839), 9 C. A P. 456 989, 

990 

(1843), 2 M. A Rob. 

461.. 714 

(1844), 1 Cox, 57 . . 703 

(1864), L. A C. 471 . . 8, 

464 1296 
Collins, Ex parte (1899), 84 L. J. N.' 

132. .103, 131, 183 
Colmer, R. r. (1864), 9 Cox, 506 327, 825 
Colwell r. St Pancras (Mavor, etc.) 

(1904), 1 Ch. 707. .1184, 1185 
Combe r. Pitt (1/63), 8 Burr. 1423, 

1434. . 67 
Combe's Case (1614), 9 Co. Rep. 76a 795 
Commissioner of Police, e. Donovan 

(1903), I K. B. 895. .1817, 1322, 1326 
Commonwealth v, Bowen (1816), 18 

Mass. 856. . 780 

r. Feeley, 2 Virg. 

Cas. 1. .414, 1078 
Compagnon e. Martin (1772), 2 W. 

Bl. 790. . 803 
Companhia de Mozambique r. 
British S. Africa Co. (1893), App. 

Cas. 602. . 36 
Compton v. Bearcroft (1768), 
2 Hagg. Consist. Rep. 

376.. 1175 

- U. r. (1788), Cald. 246 .. 148 

(1828), 3 C. 4 P. 

418. .216, 635 

(1885), 7 C. A P. 

189.. 635 



Ixiv 



Table of Cases. 



1'A.GK 

Comptroller of Patents. R. r. (1899), 

1 Q. B. 906. .139, 282 
Conde, R. r. (1868), 10 Cox, 647 . . 321, 

803 

Coney, R. r. (1882), 8 Q. B. D. 534 15, 

391, 790, 791, 834, 835, 1099 

Connell, R. r. (1853), 6 Cox, 178 . . 173, 

219 1295 

(1895), 6 Queensland 

L. J. 209. . 66n 

Conner, R. r. (1835), 7 C. & P. 438 796 

Conning, R. r. (1868), 11 Cox, 134 378 
Connolly, R. r. (1829), 2 Lewin, 

229. . 31 

Connop, R. r. (1836), 4 A. A E. 942 68 

Connor, R. r. (1845), 1 Cox, 233 . . 415 

(1846), 2 Cox, 65 . . 654 

Consolidated Exploration and 

Finance Co. v. Musgrave (1900), 

ICh. 37..111, 1091 
Constable, R. r. (1826), 7 D. A R. 

663. . 227 
Constable's Case (1601), 5 Co. Rep. 

107. . 39 
Constantine, R. r. (1848), 7 St. Tr. 

(N. S.)1127.. 951 
Conway, R. r. (1845), 7 Ir. L. R. 

149.. 223 
Conybeare r. London School Board 

(1891), 1Q. B. 118.. 245 
Coogan, R. r. (1787), 1 Leach, 448 172, 

174, 702, 725 
Cook r. Nethercote (1834), 6 C. A P. 

741.. 414, 894 

— R. r. (1660), 2 St. Tr. 1077 . . 939 

— (Peter), R. r. (1696), 18 St. Tr. 

311. .204, 205, 414, 939 

— R. r. (1774), 1 Leach, 105. .79, 800, 

469 

(1870), 11 Cox, 642 .. 825 

(1899), 20 N. S. W. Rep. 

(Law) 264.. 219 
Cooke, R. v. (1824), 1 C. A P. 321 411, 

414 

(1824), 2 B. 4 C. 871 168 

(1836), 7 C. 4 P. 559 52, 

301, 1060 

(1888), 8 C. A P. 582 803, 

348,715,718,720,721,731 

(1851), 2 Den. 462 . . 1046 

(1858), 1 F. A F. 64 . . 609 

(1871), L.R. ICC. R. 

295. .461, 699 
Cooke r. Hughes (1824), Ry. A M. 

112.. 1023 

— r. Stratford (1844), 13 M. A 

W. 379.. 617 
Cooinbes, R. r. (1786), 1 Leach, 

388. .88, 39 

(1895), Wood- 

Renton, Lunacy, 913. . 15 

Cooper v. Crane (1898), Prob. 369. . 898 

— v. Marsden (1793), 1 Esp. 1 881 

— r. Slade (1858), 6 H. L. C. 

746.. 1262 



I 



Cooper Re (1882), 20 Ch. D. 611 . . 727 
, — - R. r. (1639), Cro. Car. 644 796 

(1746), 2 8tr. 1246 . . 68 

(1833), 5 C. A P. 635 16, 

1304 

, (1848), 4 St. Tr. (X. 

S.) 1249. .998, 1278 
j (1846), 8 Q.B. 538.. 1128 

(1847), 2 C. 4 K. 586 740 

(1849), 3 Cox, 647 .. 636, 

637,538 

(1849), 1 Den. 469 . . 784 

(1862), 8C.4K. 318 840 

(I860), 1 Ross. Cr. 

(6th ed.) 686. . 1102 

(1874), L. R. 2 C. C. 

R. 123. .576, 580m 

(1875), 1 Q. B. D. 19 811, 

616 

(1877), 2 Q. B. D. 510 596, 

601, 604, 606 
Coote, R. r. (1873), L. R. 4 P. C. 

599. .828, 399 
Cupeland, R. r. (1842), C. A Mar. 

516.. 600 
Copley, R. r. (1865), 4 F. A F. 1097 21 1 
Coppen r. Moore, No. I (1898), 2 

Q.B. 300.. 11 52, 1153 

— v. Moore, No. 2 (1898), 2 • 

Q.B. 806. .36, 1152, 
Coppock r. Bower (1888), 4 M. A W. 

861. .1089m 
Corbett, R. r. (1903), Queensland 

State Rep. 246. .29», 824 
Corfell, R. r. (1844), 1 Cox, 123 . . 211 
Cornforth, R. r. (1742), 2 Str. 1162 901 
Cornish r. Searell (1828), 8 B. A C. 

471.. 362 

— R. r. (1864), 6 Cox, 432, 

433n; Dears. 425.. 456 
Cornwall, R. r. (1781), 2 Str. 881.. 632 

(1817), R. A R. 336 825 

Come, R. r. (1904), 68 J. P. Rep. 

294. .394, 1205 
Conen r. Dubois (1816), Holt (N. P.) 

239.. 412 
Con-en's Case (1604), 12 Co. Rep. 

105.. 700 
Corv, R. r. (1864), 10 Cox, 23 . . 489 
Cosans, R. r. (1785), 1 Leach, 342, 

348n (a).. 1018 
Cosnelt, R. r. (1901), 20 Cox, 6 605, 

1149 
Cosser, R. r. (1876), 13 Cox, 187 . . 459, 

576 
Costar r. Hetherington (1859), 1 

E. A E. 802. . 175 
Costello, Ex parte (1868), Ir. Rep. 

2 C. L. 880. . 283 
Coteswortb, R. v. (1706), 6 Mod. 172 886 
Cotton, R. o. (1813), 8 Camp. 444. . 1228 

(1878), 12 Cox, 400 . , 809 

Conlson, R. v. (1850), 1 Den. 692 . . 74, 

606 

— Ex parte (1887), 20 Q. B. 

D. 249.. 1145 



Table of Chan. 



Ixv 



rAGi 
Cenlsoa r. Disborough (1894), 2 

Q. B. 316.. 415 
Cwutr, R. r. (1816), 2 Ross. Cr. 

(6th ed.) 193, 283. . 49 
Conrt, R. r. (1853), 6 Cox, 202 .. 854 
Coarteenr.Tonse(l907),lCamp.43 417 
CovrtenaY, R. r. (1850), 5 Cox, 218 

(/t\).. 629 
Cowtivroa v. Meanicr (1851), 6 Ex. 

74.. 1144 
Courtney, R. v. (1856), 7 Cox, 111 

(/r.).. 1050 
Coarroirier, R. r. (1840), 9 C. ft P. 

862.. 208 
Covtney, R. r . (1837), 7 C. 4 P. 667 375 
Coventry (Bishop), R. r. (1581), 1 

Leon. 5. . 290 
Cowan r. Milbourn (1867), L. R. 2 

Ex. 230. . 1022 
Coward r. Baddeley (1859), 4 H. ft 

N.478.. 885 
CoweO, R. r. (1796), 2 East, P. C. 

617,781.. 553 
Corks v. Dvnbar (1827), 2 C. A P. 

565.. 894 
Cox r.Allingham (1822), Jacob, 514 865 

— r. Coleridge (1822), IB. AC. 87 838 

— R. r. (1770), 1 Leach, 71 . . 1057 

(1818), R. ft R. 362 . .841, 812 

(1831), 4 C. ft P. 538, 

540. .227, 1101 

(1882), 5 C. ft P. 297 .. 911 

(1844), 1 C. ft K. 494 . . 76 

(1848), 8 Cox, 58 . .819, 820 

(1858), 1 F. ft F. 90 . . 550 

(1863), 9 Cox, 301 . . 1074 

(1885), 14 Q. B. D. 153. . 401, 

1150, 1280 

(1898), 1 Q. B. 179 . .853, 889, 

890, 916, 917 

(1898), 62 J. P. 89 . . 388 

Coxbead, R. r. (1845), 1 C. ft K. 

823.. 824 

- r. Richard* (1846), 2 C. B. 

569.. 1132 
Coxon v. Lyon (1810), 2 Camp. 

807*. .297, 298 
Gyle, R. r. (1855), 7 Cox, 74 . . 416 
Conns, R. r. (1780), 2 Doug. 426. . 147, 

149 
Tnb, R. r. (1868), 11 Cox, 85 . . 601 
Crabbe, R. r. (1895), 59 J. P. 247. . 10 
Cracknell, R. r. (1866), 10 Cox, 408 404, 

587 
Craddock, R. r. (1850), 2 Den. 81 84, 

275 
Cradoek. R. r. 1863), 8 F. ft F. 887 1172 
Cramp, R. r . (1817), R. ft R. 827 . . 770 

(1880), 5 Q. B. D. 307 828, 

829 849 

(1880), 14 Cox, 390 . . '391, 

828 
Canage, R. r. (1713), 1 Rnss. Cr. 

(6th e<L) 436». . 299 
CnabBTD, R. v. (1696), 2 Salfc. 683 988 
Cnvw, R. r. (J801), R. ft R. 14 . . 74 



TACK 



Crawford, K. r. (1845), 1 Deo. 100 851 

— Be (1849), 13 Q. B. 

618 . . 1040 

— R. r. (1854). 6 Cox, 481 108 
Crawle r. Crawle ( 1683), 1 Yen. 170 282 
Crawshaw, R. r. (I860), Bell, 303. .4, 33, 

1203, 1205 
Crawshay, Ex parte (1860), 8 Cox, 

356. .145, 953 
Creagh r. Gamble (1888), 24 L. R. 

Ir. 458.. 893 
Creau, R. r. (1861), 8 Cox, 509 .. 208 
Creed, R. r. (1843), 1 C. ft K. 63 . . 572 
Creese, R. r. (1874), L. R. 2 C. C. R. 

105.. 1145 
Creevey, R. r. (1813), 1 M. ft Sel. 

278. .843, 993, 995, 996 
Creevy r. Carr (1835), 7 C. ft P. 64 419 
Crespigny, R. r. (1795), 1 Esp. 280 1050 
Crew r. Saunders ( 1735), 2 Str. 1005 357 
Creaswell, R. r. (1876), 1 Q. B. D. 

446. .844, 1170 
Crick, R. r. (1832), 5 C. ft P. 508. . 1247 

(1858), 1 F. ft F. 519. . 788 

Cricklade, R. r. (1849), 3 E. ft B. 

947n.. 292 
Crightoo, R. r. (1803), R. ft R. 62 487, 

560 
Criminal Code of Canada, Re (1897), 

26 Canads, 461. .1167n 
Crisham, R. r. (1841), C. ft Mar. 

187. .16, 303, 907, 1299 
Crisp, R. r. (1818), 1 B. ft Aid. 282 1094 
Critchley, Ex parte (1845), 16 L. J. 



,£ 



Q. k) 124. .1090n 



Crocker, R. r. (1805), K. ft R. 97». . 298, 

712 
Crockett. R. r. (1831), 4 C. ft P. 544 321 
Crofts, R. r. (1840), 9 C. ft P. 219. . 1319 
Crohagan, R. r. (1633), Cro. Car. 

332.. 939 
Crompton U. D. C, R. v. (1902), 20 

Cox, 243. . 1213 
Cromwell (Lord), R. r. (1602), Yelv. 

16.. 102 
Cronk r. Frith (1839), 9 C. ft P. 

197.. 382 
Cronmire, R. v. (1886), 16 Cox, 42 576 
Crook r. Dowling (1782), 8 Dongl. 

75.. 360 

— R. r. (1869), .1 F. ft F. 521. . 788 
Crooke, R. r. (1731), 2 Str. 901 . . 718 

— r. Poweracourt (Lord) 

(1868), 16 W. R. 969. .1090n 
Crookes, R. v. (1766), 8 Burr. 1841 121 
Cropper v. Horton (1826), 8 D. ft R. 

166. . 895 

— R. v. (1887), 2 Mood. 18 . . 206 
Crosby t>. Leng (1810), 12 East, 409 263 

— r. Percy (1808), 1 Camp. 803 881 

— R. r. (1843), 1 Cox, 10 . . 612 
Cross, R. v. (1702), 1 Ld. Raym . 71 1 5 

[1812), 3 Camp. 227 . . 1216 
1826), 2 C. ft P. 483. . 1184 
1856), Dears, ft B. 68 828 
!l859), IF. ft F. 610.. 1179 



lxvi 



TabU of Cases. 



TAGB 

CrossAeld, K. p. (1796), 26 SI. Tr. 1, 

57. • 941 
Crowley, R. v. (1797), 7 T. R. 315*1045, 

1064 

(1837), 2 M. 4 Rob. 

17. .607, 608 

(1839), 10 A. k E. 

182. . 5 
Crouch, R. v. (1844), 1 Cox, 94 . . 29 
Croocher, R. v. (1862), 8 F. fr F. 285 870 
Croother, R. p. (1600), Cro. Elix. 654 1085 
Crow, R. v. (1823). 1 Lewin, 88 . . 557 
Crowe, R. p. (1848), 8 Cox, 123 .. 991 
Crowhuxst, R. v. (1844), 1 C, A K. 

870.. 340 
Crowharst, R. r. (1723), 24 Ld. 

Ravm. 1363. . 93 
Crowther, R. r. (1832), 5 C. k P. 316 7 18 
Cramp, R. p. (1825), 1 C. k P. 658 442 
Crumpton, R. p. (1842), C. k Mar. 

597.. 784 
Cranden, R. r. (1809), 2 Camp. 89 1189 
Cruse. R. r. (1838), 8 C. k P. 541. .29, 31 
Cratchley, R. r. (1831), 5 C. k P. 

133.. 675 

(1837), 7 C. * P. 

814 786 
Cryer, R. r. (1857), Dears, k B. 824 48, 

549 
Crystal, The (1894), App. Cas. 508 1219 
Cubitt p. Maxse (1878), L R. 8C. P. 

715.. 1224 
Cuckfield Urban District Council r. 

Goring (1898), 1 Q. B. 865 . . 1214 
Cuddy, R. r. (1843), 1 C. k K. 210 15, 

789 
Cuffev, R. p. (1848), 7 St. Tr. (N. SO 

467 . . 205, 951 
Culleo, R. p. (1831), 1 Hood. 800. . 738 

(1840), 9 C. k P. 681 1179 

Culling p. Culling (1896), Prob. 116 1174 
Cullum, R. p. (18/8), L. R. 2 C. C. R. 

28 . . 570, 671 
Cumberland, R. p. (1795), 6T. R. 

194. .181, 1288 
dimming, R. p. (1848), 7 St. Tr. 

(N. S.)485.. 961 
Cumpton, R. p. (1880), 6 Q. B. D. 

341 . . 106, 810, 864 

CundelL R. p. (1812) 946 

— p. Pratt (1827), M. k M. 

108 . • 404 910 
Cundick, R. p. (1822), D. <fc R. (N. P.)' 

18.. 1208 
Cundy p. Lecocq (1884), 13 Q. B. D. 

207. .84*35 
— p. Lindsay (1878), 3 App. 

Cas. 459 . . 269, 466, 456, 615 
CunUffe p. Sefton (1801), 2 East, 183 881 
Cunningham, R. p. (1858), Bell, 72 39, 817 
Cureton p. R. (1861), 1 B. A S. 208 1246, 

1247, 1248 
Curgerwen, R. p. (1865), L. R. 1 

C. C. R. 1 . . 1179 
Curl, R. p. (1727), 17 St. Tr. 158 ; 

2 Str. 789 . . 145, 1022,1190 



I\AGE 



Curling, R. c. (1807), K. «fc R. 123 . . 539 
Curnock, R. p. (1841), 9 C. k P. 730 866 
Curran, R. p. (1828), 3 C. k P. 397 807 

— p. Treleaven (1891), 2 Q. B. 

545.. 1161 
Currie r. Child (1813), 3 Camp. 283 381 

— R. p. (1904), 68 J. P. Rep. 294 1204 
Curry, R. p. (1841), 2 Mood. 218 . . 729, 

738 
Curtis p. Curtis (1834), 10 Bing. 477 1130 

— p. Marsh (1858), 28 L. J. Ex. 

58.. 621, 1245 

— R. p. (1756), FosL 136 . . 812 

(1848), 2 C. k K. 763 428 

(1885), 15 Cox. 746 .. 784 

(1904), 21 T. L R. 87 374 

Curran, R. p. (1826), 1 Mood. 182 . . 793, 

807 
Curwood, R. p. (1835), 8 A. k E. 

815 . . 69, 71 
Cutbusb, R. p. (1867), L. R. 2 Q. B. 

879 232 
Cutis, R. p. (1850), 4 Cox, 435 '. '. 1056 



DADE, R. p. (1831), 1 Mood. 307. .13, 715 
Dadson, R. p. (1850), 2 Den. 86 . . 797, 

812, 1088 
Dagnall, lie (1896), 2 Q. B. 407 . . 1145 
Dale, R. p. (1886), 7 C. k P. 352 . . 612 

(1852), 6 Cox, 14 ..816,818 

J1889), 16 Cox, 703 . . 809, 829 

Dallowar, R. p. (1847), 2 Cox, 278 . . 802 
Dalmas,'R. p. (1844), 1 Cox, 95 . . 822 
Dalrymple p. Dairy mple (1811), 2 

Hagg. Consist Rep. 54 . . 847, 1174, 1180 
Dalton (O'Brien), Ex parte (1890), 

28L.R.Ir. 86.. 186 
Daly, R. p. (1840). 9 C. k P. 342 . . 1089 
Dammaree, R. p. (1710), 15 St. Tr. 

521,605.. 94a 
Dane, R. p. (1868), 1 F. k F. 328 . . 1179 
Danger, R. p. (1857), Dears, k B. 

307.. 694 
Daniel, R. p. (1704), 1 Salk. 880 . . 6 

- p. Janes (1877), 2 C. P. D. 

851 692 
Dann, R. p. (1835), 1 Mood. 424 . . 171 
Dannelly, R. p. (1816), R. k R. 310 19, 

442, 1304 
Dant, R. p. (1865), L. k C. 567 800, 

801 

Darby p. Ouseley (1856), 1 H. k N. 1 1131 

— R. p. (1702), 7 Mod. 100 . . 1071 

Dark, R. p. (1847), 1 Den. 276 . . 602 

Darley, R. p. (1803), 4 East, 174 . . 94 

(1826), 1 Stark. (N.P.) 

859 . . 617 
Darrel, R. p. (1715), 10 Mod. 821 . . 989 
Dart, R. p. (1878), 14 Cox, 143 . . 28 
Dartnell, R. p. (1869), 20 L. T. 1020 466 
Da Sa (Pantaleon) (case of) (1654), 

5 St. Tr. 461 . . 21 
Daubney p. Cooper (1829), 10 B. k 

C. 287.. 838 



Table of Gases. 



Ixvii 



PAGE 

Dam*, R. r. (1830), 1 Crawf. k Dix 

(Ir. Circ. Hep.) 166 . . 812 
Davenport, R. r. (1826), 2 Ross. Gr. 

(6th ed.) 146 . . 450 
Darentrr R. D. C. r. Parker (1900), 

1 Ch. 1. .1214, 1231 
Davie, R. r. (1781), 2 Dong. 588 . . 147 
Danes r. London, etc., Marine 
Insurance Co. (1878), 8 Ch. 

D. 469 . .1090a 
Darks r. Stephenson (1890), 24 

Q. B. D. 529 . . 1205 

— R. r. (1712), 2 East, P. C. 

709 . . 524 

(1794), 5. T. R. 626 . . 1197, 

1200 

(1800), 2 Leach, 876.. 626 

Daries r. R. (1829), 10 B. k U. 89 . . 67, 

1247 

— R. r. (1853), 6 Cox, 326 .. 184 

(1856), Dears. 640 504, 514 

(1858), IF. *F. 69.. 652 

(1866), 10 Cox, 239 . . 458 

(1897), 2 Q. B. 199 . . 1201 

Dans, R. r. (1754), Sayer, 163 3, 1088 

(1762), 3 Burr. 1317. . 147 

(1772), Lofft, 62 .. 147 

(1783), 1 Leach, 271.. 5 

(1788), 1 lynch, 556 . . 79 

(1806), R. k R. 113 13, 720 

(1817), R. k R. 322.. 633, 

646 

(1823), R. k R. 499 . . 633 

(1824), 1 C. k P. 470 94 

(1829), 3 Russ. Cr. 

(6th ed.) 167.. 824 

(1837), 7 C. A P. 785 207, 

208, 809, 867 

(1839), 8 C. k P. 759 866, 

1249 

(1861), L. k C. 64 . . 806 

(1870), L. R. 1 C. C. R. 

272.. 553 

(1881), 14 Cox, 563.. 29 

(1883), 15 Cox, 174 . . 782 

(1901), 17T.L.B.164 212 

Daris r. Capper (1829), 10 B. k C. 

28.. 896 

— r. Dale (1830), V. k M. 514 407 

— *. Dinwoody (1792), 4 T. R. 

678.. 398 

— r. Tiring (1816), Holt (N. P.) 

275.. 393 

— v. Williams (1811), 13 East, 

232.. 365 
Davison r. Duncan (1857), 7 E. k B. 

229.. 997 

— B. r. (1808), 31 St. Tr. 99 1014 

(1820), 4 B. k Aid. 329 1095 

(I860), 8 Cox, 360.. 224, 

DaTissn, Re (1896), 60 J. P. 808 267, 269 
Ifcritt, R. r. (1870), 11 Cox, 676 951, 1278 
Dsry.R. r. (1844), 1 Cox, 60 . . 663 

— Ex parte (1842), 2 Dowl. 

^ V (N. S.)24.. 1109 

1XJ\ 



I\AGI 

Dawber, R. r. (1821), 3 Stark. (N.P.) 

34 391 
Dawkins r. Rokeby (Lord) (1876), 

L. R. 7H. L. 744.. 1132 
Dawson, R. r. (1696), 13 St. Tr. 451, 

454 . .539, 542 

(1"17), 1 Str. 19 . .220, 711 

(1821), 3 Stark. (N.P.) 

62.. 304 

(1851). 2 Den. 75 .. 734 

Day, R. r. (1755), Sayer, 202 .. 295 

(1841), 9 C. <feP. 722 .. 834 

(1852), 6 Cox, 55 .. 869 

(1870), 11 Cox, 505 217, 866 

Day p. Robinson (1834), 1 A. k E. 

554.. 1130 
Dayrell p. Glascock (1693), Skin. 

413 . . 382 
Deacon, R. p. (1746), 18 St. Tr. 865 44, 

806, 940, 941 

(18*24), Ry. k M. 27 122 

Deakin, R. r. (1800), 2 East, P. C. 

653 . . 59 
Dean, R. p. (1896), 17 N. S. W. Rep. 

(Law) 357.. 1014 
Deane v. Thomas (1829), M. k M. 

361 . 1172 

— R. p. (1851). 5 Cox, 501 '. ! 224 

Deasy, R. v. (1883), 15 Cox, 334 . . 943, 

951 1 278 
Deares, R. p. (1869), 11 Cox, 227 . .' 445 
Deaville (1903), 1 K. B. 468 . . 1204 
De Banks, R. p. (1884), 13 Q. B. D. 

29 457 
De Berenger, R. v. (1814), 3 M.'er 

Sel. 67 . . 1280, 1284 

(1814), Stork. 

Ev. (4th ed.) 167 . . 417 
De Bode (Baron) v. R. (1845), 6 St. 

Tr. (N. 8.) 237 . . 347 
Debtor, lie a (1898), 2 Q. B. 576 . . 1145 
Dee, R. 9. (1884), 15 Cox, 579 . . 906, 909 
Deeler, R. v. (1831), 1 Mood. 303 . . 30 In 
Deer/R. v. (1862), L. k C. 240 . . 460, 553 
Deering, R. r. (1869), 11 Cox, 298 . . 443 
De Kromme, R. p. (1892), 17 Cox, 

402 . . 1293 
De la Motte, R. p. (1781), 21 St. fr! 

687 . . 938, 946 
Dclaval, R. p. (1763), 3 Burr. 1434 . . 145, 

1279 
De Londo, R. p. (1765), 2 East, P. C. 

1098 . . 679 
De Mattos, R. p. (1836), 7 C. k P. 

458 . . 41 
Denmour, R. p. (1861), 8 Cox, 440 459 
Denison, R. p. (1758), 2 Ld. Ken von, 

259 . . 1250 
Dennis, R. p. (1894), 2 Q. B. 458 . . 1165, 

1186 
Dennison, R. r. (1773), Lofft, 148 . . 146 
Denny, R. p. (1845), 1 Cox, 178 . . 787 
De Mette r. De Mette (1858), 28 

L. J. (Matr.) 117.. 117G 
Dent's Case (1874), Wood-Renton, 

Lanacv, 682 . . 874 

/ 



Jxviii 



Table of Gases. 



PAGE 

Dent, R. r. (1843), 1 C. i K. 249 . . 608 
Denton, R. p. (1852), 18 Q. B. 761 6, 

226, 1211, 1230 

(1864), 34 L. J. (M. 

C.) 13 . . 1235 
D'Eon (Chevalier), R. p. (1764), 

3 Burr. 1518 .. 123, 1128 
Depardo, R. r. (1807), R. A R. 184 

41,780 
Derby p. Bloomfield (1904), 68 J. P. 

Rep. 391 . . 1202 
Derbyshire, R. p. (1831), 3 B. A Ad. 

147 . . 1239 

(1842),2Q.B.745 686, 

1236 1239 
Derrington, R. p. (1826), 2 C. A P.' 

418.. 334 
Designy*s Case (1682), SirT. Ravm. 

474.. 891 
Desmond, R. p. (1868), 11 Cox, 146 339, 

1288 
De Vcaux, R. p. (1792), 2 Leach, 

585.. 267 
Devctt, R. p. (1838), 8 C. A P. 639 82 
Devon, H. p. (1811), 14 East, 477 1235 

(1824), Ry, A M. 144 . . 1285 

(1825), 4 B. A C. 670 . . 1236 

(1833), 5 B. A Ad. 883 1236 

Dewdney r. Palmer (1839), 4 M. A 

W. 664.. 387 
Dcwell p. Saunders (1618), Cro. Jac. 

490.. 1181, 1184 
Dcwhurst, R. p. (1820), 1 St. Tr. 

(N. S.)529.. 1098 
De Wilton, Re (1900), 2 Cfa. 481 . . 854, 

1172, 1176 
Dewitt, R. p. (1849), 2 C. 4 K. 905 755 
Dexter, R. p. (1899), 19 Cox, 860 . .8, 584 
Dick, R. p. (1770), 1 Leach, 68 . . 708 
Dicken, R. r. (1877), 14 Cox, 8 . . 915 
Dickenson, R. p. (1879), 2 Rubs. Cr. 

(6th ed.) 511 . . 614 
Dickcson p. Hilliard (1878), 43 L. J. 

(Ex.) 87 . . 1132 
Dickius p. Gill (1896), 2 Q. B. 310 . . 750, 

760, 766, 982, 983 
Dickinson, R. p. (1810), R. A R. 401 98 

(1820), R. 4 R. 420 441 

Dicks, R. v. (1817), 1 Russ. Cr. (6th 

ed,) 147 . . 31 
Dignam, R. p. (1837), 7 A. A E. 593 227 
Dillett, lie (1887), 12 App. Cas. 459 279 
DiUon, R. r. (1817), 2 Chit (K. B.) 

314.. 1111 

(1877), 14 Cox, 4 . . 1064, 

1067 
Dillon p. O'Brien (1887), 16 Cox, 

245 . . 267, 1091 
Dilmore, R. v. (1852), 6 Cox, 52 . . 371 
Dilworth, R. r. (1843), 2 M. A Rob. 

531 . . 835, 847 
Dingier, R. v. (1791), 2 Leach, 561 . , 321, 

323, 372 
Dingley, R. p. (1846), 1 C.AK.637 

332 334 
Diprose, R. r. (1868), 11 Cox, 185 . . ' 563 



rAGK 

Ditcheat (Iuhal*.), U. r. (1829), 9 

B. AC. 176.. 627 
Dixon r. Fairer (1886), 17 Q. B. D. 

667 ; 18 Q. B. D. 43 . . 46, 139, 144 

— v. Lee (1834), 1 Cr. M.iR. 

645.. 413 

— R.P. (1703), 6 Mod. 61 .. 131 

(1716), 10 Mod. 835 . . 81, 

1197, 1200 

(1756), 1 East, P. C. 313 813 

(1765), 3 Burr. 1687.. 412 

(1803), R. A R. 53 . . 518 

(1814), 8 M. A SeL 11 2, 

303, 348, 619, 1010, 1163, 

1186 

(1834), 6 C. A P. 601 10OO, 

1098 

(1856), Dears. 580 .. 445 

(1869), 11 Cox, 178 . . 566 

(1869), 11 Cox, 341 . . 28 

Dobbe, R. v. (1770), 2 East, P. C. 

513.. 634 

Dobson, R. v. (1806), 7 East, 218 . . 611 

Dodd, R. P. (1777), 1 Leach, 155 . . 390 

(1808), 9 East, 516 . . 148 

(1877) (unreported) .. 275 

Doddridge, R. r. (1860), 8 Cox, 335 14, 

867 

Dodson, R. r. (1898), 62 J. P. 729 . . 561 
Dodwell p. Burford (1670), 1 Mod. 

24.. 836 
Doe (J.) p. Andrews (1778), 2 Cowp. 

845.. 402 

— r. Andrews (1850), 15 Q. B. 

756.. 353 

— p. Barnes (1834), 1 M. A 

Rob. 386.. 853 

— r. Cartwright (1820), 8 B. 

A Aid. 826.. 386 

— p. Fowler (1850), 14 Q. B. 

700 .. 358, 1170 

— p. Gatacre (1838), 8 C. A 

P. 578.. 354 

— r. Griffin (1812), 15 East, 

293.. 318 

— r. Gunning (1837), 2 Nev. 

A P. 260.. 365 

— p. Mew (1837), 2 Nev. A P. 

266 . • 365 

— r . Newton ( 1836), 5 A. A E. 

514 . . 383n 

— p. Perkins (1790), 3 T. R. 

749.. 418 

— p. Powell (1836), 7 C. A P. 

617.. 882 

— p. Roe (1809), 2 Camp. 280 419 
(1838), 6 Dowl. 518 402 

~ p. Ross (1840), 7 M. A W. 

102.. 386 

— p. Sisson (1810), 12 East, 

62.. 818 

~ p. Smith (1795), 1 Esp. 391 382 

— p. Suck erni ore (1835), 5 A. 

A E. 703 . . 383 

— p. Tnrford (1832), 3 B. A 

Ad. 898.. 321 



Table of Case*. 



Ixix 



Doc U.) r. Webster (1840), 12 A. A 

E. 44* . . 63 

- r. WooUey (1828), 8 B. & 

C. 22 . • 381 

Dohertr t B.r. (1874),13Cox^23.! 332 

(1874), 13 Cox, 24 . . 332 

(1887), 16 Cox,806 . . 29, 

210, 786, 800 

Man, R. r. (1855), Dears. 436 .. 278, 563 
Dolby, B. r. (1821), 1 C. ft K. 238 . . 201 

(1823), 2 St. Tr. (N.S.) 

939 .. 198, 201, 203, 205 
Doncaster (Major) r. Day (1810), 3 

Taunt. 262.. 362 
Domann, R. r. (1770), 1 Leach, 69 648, 

654 
Doamallr, R. r. (1779), 1 Leach, 193 524, 

525 
Doemelly, R. r. (1835), 1 Mood. 438 735 

(And tee Dannelly.) 
Donovan, R. r. (1850), 4 Cox, 401 838, 84o 
Doodj, R. r. (1854), 6 Cox, 463 . . 3, 29 
Dooley, R. r. (1871), 12 Cox, 623a 248 
Doolubdaa* r. Bam Loll (1850), 5 

Moore Ind. App. 109 . . 1280 
Dona, R. r. (1790), 1 Leach, 538 . . 99 

(1791), 1 Esp. 127 .. 655 

(1838), 2 Mood. 37 .. 407 

Done* r. Meux (1854), 15 C. B. 

142.. 365 
Dorset R. r. (1881), 45 L. T. 808 . . 1240 
— C. C, B. r. (1902), 67 J. P. 

Rep. 19.. 1213 
Doasett, R. r. (1846), 2 C. ft K. 306 810, 

652,653 
Douglas, R. r. (1836), 1 Mood. 480 835 

(1841), C. A Mar. 193 186 

(1845), 1C. ft K. 670 877 

( 1846), 13 Q. B. 42 . . 1014, 

1081 

r. R (1847), 13 Q. B. 74. . 79 
R. p. (1808), 1 Camp. 212 79, 

300, 596, 610 
Dore, R. r. (1858), Wood-Kenton, 

Lunacy, 900 . . 27 
Dover, R. r. (1835), 1 Cr. M. ft R. 

726.. 119 
Dorey, R. r. (1851), 2 Den. 86 . . 87, 217 

551 
Domqkle'sCe*3fl606),6Co.Rep.47 220 
Dawdle, R. r. (1900), 26 Vict. L. R. 

687 798 
Dowey, R. v. (1868), 37 L. J. (M. C.) 

52.. 606 
Downs, R. r. (1793), 5 T. R. 811 . . 207, 

1056, 1060, 1062 
Dowhag, R.r. (1826), By. A M. 488 298 

(1848), 7 St. Tr. (N. 

S .)«U.. «*,««.*£ 

fhnti, B. : (1789), 2 £■«*' *^. m 
(Igjg), 1 Q. B. D- 26 8<H« 



VXGK 

Downev, R. r. (1845), 2 Q. B. 281 . . 109 
- — (1845), 8 Cr. ft D. 

(/r.)314.. 124 
Downholland, K. p. (1845), 15 L. J. 

(M. C.) 25 . . 1234 
Downing, K. p. (1844), 1 Den. 52 . . 16, 

19,1299 
Down&hire (Marchioness), K. r. 

(1835), 4 A. ft E. 282 1221 

— (Marquis), R. v. (1885), 

3 A. ft E. 816, cti.. . 71 

— (Marquis), R. r. (1836), 

4 A. ft £. 698 . . 71, 1223 
Dowse. R. v. (1865), 4 F. ft F. 492 211 
Dowsell, R. r. (1884), 6 C. ft P. 898 1249 
Doyen, K. p. (1899), 34 L. J. K. 645 118 
Doyle, R. r. (1768), 1 Leach, 67 • . 779 
Drage, R. r. (1878), 14 Cox, 85 . . 552 

— r. lbberson (1798), 2 Esp. 

643.. 1090n 
Drake, R. p. (1707), 2 Salk. 661 .. 802 

— p. Footitt: Drake r. Hankin 

(1881),7Q.B.D.20l.. 671 

— R. r. (1903), 22 N. Z. L. R. 

762.. 795 

Dredge, R. p. (1845), 1 Cox, 235 . . 841 

Drew v. Harlow (1875), 39 J. P. 420 858 

— R. p. (1837), 8 C. ft P. 140 . . 385 

Drewett, R. r. (1904), 96 J. P. Rep. 

37 592 
Dreyer r. Illinois (1903), 167 V. S*. 

71.. 224 

Dring, R. r. (1857), Dears, ft B. 829 551 

Dripps, R. r. (1874), 13 Cox, 25 . . 123 

DriscoU, R. v. (1841), C. ft Mar. 214 837 
Druitt, R. v. (1867), 10 Cox, 592 . . 1158, 

1159 
Drammond, R. r. (1784), 1 Leach, 

878 824 

Drury, R. r. (1848), 3 C. ft K. 193" 161, 
170, 171, 172, 174, 288, 289, 894u 
Du Bane' r. Livette (1791), Peake, 

108 (8rd ed.) . . 401 
Duckworth, R. v. (1892), 2 Q. B. 83 8, 

821, 828, 843, 1296 
Dudley, R. p. (1884), 14 Q. B. D. 

278, 560 . . 41, 42, 125, 128, 219, 220, 
230, 298, 865, 792, 797, 1134 
Dudley, etc., Banking Co. p. Spittle 

(1860), 1J. ft H. 14 . . 264 
Duffield, R. p. (1851), 5 Cox, 404 . . 1158, 

1288 
Duffin, R. r. (1818), R. ft R. 865 . . 808, 

841 
Duffy, R. r. (1846), 6 St. Tr. (N. 8.) 

803.. 991, 997, 1023 

(l848),7St.Tr.(N.8.) 

795 . . 168, 164, 166, 201, 

203,951 
Dugdale, R. p. (1836), Short, ft 

Mellor,Cr.Off.Pr.250.. 191 

— p. R. (1852), Dears. 64 . . 980 

(1853), 1 E. ft B. 435 3, 

1190, 1193 

(1853), 2 E. ft B. 129, 

425.. 286 



lxz 



Table of Cotes. 



PAGE 

Duggan, R. r. (1873), Jr. Rep. 7 

C. L. 94 . . 138 
Da Moulin r. Druitt (I860), 13 lr. 

C. L. Rep. 212 . . 1174 
Dunboyne (Lord), R. r. (I860), 3 C. 

A K. 1 . . 751 
Duncan, R. r. (1881), 7 Q. B. D. 

198.. 292 

(1890), Wood-Ren- 

ton,Lunacy,901,908 27 

Duncan r. Scott (1807), 1 Camp. 

100 . . 359 

- r. Thwaites (1824), 3 B. A 

C. 583.. 997 
Duncombe, R. r. (1838), 8 C. A P. 

369.. 421 
Dundas, R. r. (1854), 6 Cox, 380 . . 603 
Danger, R. r. (1864), 4 F. 4 F. 99 835, 

911 
Dunklev, R. r. (1825), 1 Mood. 90 534 
Dann, R. r. (1765), 2 East P. C. 

976.. 711, 713 

(1800). 8T. R. 217 . . 134, 135 

- (1822), 1 D. & R. 10. . 1044, 

1045, 1055 

(1826), 1 Mood. 146.. 89, 

436,552,553,643 
— - (1881), 4 CAP. 543.. 381, 

332 

(1843),1C.4:K.730.. 121, 

139 

(1843), 2 Mood. 297 . . 801, 

1048, 1058 

(1847), 11 Jur. 287 . . 138 

(1847-8), 12Q.B. 1026 241, 

284, 1045, 1046, 1059 
Dunne, R. r. (1852), 5 Cox, 507 (/r.) 390 
Dunnett, R. r. (1792), 2 Leach, 581 726 

(1844), IC.dk K. 425 860, 

861 
Dunning, R. r. (1851), 5 Cox, 142 . . 261 

(1871), L. R. ICC. 

K. 290 . . 1045, 1055 

(1899), 34 L. J. N. 

83.. 399 
D ant ton, R. r. (1824), Rv. A M. 109 1048, 

1050 
Durham (Earl) r. Durham (Coun- 
tess) (1887), 10 P. D. 80 . . 1176 
Durkin, R. r. (1837), 2 Lew in, 163 . . 261 
Dupays r. Shepherd (1699), 12 Mod. 

216.. 351 
Dutton, In re ( 1892), 1 Q. B. 486 . . 192, 

193 
Dwerryhonse, R. r. (1847), 2 Cox, 

446 . . 183, 248 
Dyer, R. r. (1708), 6 Mod. 96 . , ' 122 

(1704), 6 Mod. 41 .. 298 

( 1801 ), 2 East, P. C. 767 13, 

551 
Dyke, R. v. (1838), 8 C. <fc P. 261 . . 391 
Dykes, R. r. (1885), 15 Cox, 771 . . • 82 
Dyson, R. r. (1823), R. A R. 523 . . 14, 786 

(1831), 7C. 4 P. 305» 24 

(1891), 2 Q. B. 176 . . 1147, 

1148 



Dytchc, R. r. (1890), 7 Cox, 39 



TAG* 

308 



EADON, R. r. (1813), 81 St. Tr. 

1064.. 1002 
Eagle, R. r. (1861), 2 F. A F. 827 . . 795 
Eagleton, R. r. (1855), Dears. 376, 

515 . . 8, 617, 1296 

— r . Kingston (1808) , 8 Yes. 

488, 475 . . 383 

Eardisland, R. r. (1810), 2 Camp. 

494 . . 1228, 1229 
Eamshaw, R. r. (1812), 15 East, 456 80 
Eastall, R. r. (1822), 2 Ross. Cr. 

(6th ed.) 264, 820 . . 60, 462 
East Hagbourne, R. r. (1859), Bell, 

135.. 1223 
East Mark, R. r. (1848), 11 Q. B. 

8« 7 • 1223 
East Stoke, R. r. (1865), 6 B. A 8. 

536 . . 137 
Eastern Counties Rail. Co. r. 

Broom (1851), 6 Ex. 314 . . 11 
Easton v. Richmond Highway 

Board (1871), L. R. 7 Q. B. 69 . . 1217 
Eastrington, R. r. (1836), 5 A. A E. 

765.. 1229 
Eaton, R. r. (1812), 81 St. Tr. 927 1022 

(1799), 2T. R. 89 .. 130 

Eayres, R. r. (1900), 64 J. P. 217 . . 8 

, Eccles, R. r. (1784), 1 Leach, 274. . 1282. 

1284 
Ecclesfield, R. r. (1818), 1 B. A Aid. 

348 . . 1227, 1232 
Edgar, R. r. (1817), 83 St. Tr. 145 1002, 

1004 
Edgcombe r. Rodd (1804), 5 East, 

294.. 1089n, 1091 
Edgington v. Fitzniaurice (1885), 

29 Ch. D. 459 . . 607 
Edgell, R. r. (1867), 11 Cox, 132 . . 654 
Edmonds, R. r. (1821), 1 St Tr. 

(N. S.) 785 . . 198, 201, 202, 203, 205. 

206, 291, 295 
Edmoudes, R. r. (1896), 59 J. P. 

776 . . 83 
Edinondson r. Stevenson (1766), 1 

B. A P. 527, tit. . . 1132 
Edmonstone r. Plaistead (or Plais- 

tow) (1803), 2 East, 572 . . 363 
Edmonton, R. r. (1831), 1 M. A 

Rob. 24 . . 1226 
Edsall, R. r. (1798), 2 Leach, 662« 75, 

802 
Eduljee Byramiec, Re (1846), 5 

Moore (P. C.) 276 . . 291 
Edward, R. v. (1833), 1 M. A Rob. 

257 . . 207 522 
Edwards, R. r. (1791), 4 T. R.440 ' 112 

(1812), R. A R. 224 214, 

224 

(1814), R. A R. 283 1178 

(1822), R. A R. 497 48, 46 

(1884),6C.4P.515, 

521 ..501,522,520, 531 



TMe of Cases. 



lxxiii 



PAGI 

Fifehead, R. r. (1848), 8 Cox, 59 . . 1234 
Filewood, R. p. (1787), 2 T. R. 145 151 
Finacane, R. r. (1833), 5 C. A P. 

551.. 866 
Finch, R. p. (1834), 1 Mood. 418 . . 492 
Finerty, R. r. (1801), 26 St. Tr. 901 

(/r.).. 989 
Ftneax r. Horenden (1599), Cro. El. 

664.. 6 
Finkelstein,R.r.(l886),16Cox,107 720 
Finmore, R. r. (1799), 8 T. R. 409 137 
Finneitv, R. r. (1830), 1 Crawf. 6 

Dix.(Ir.Circ.Rep.)167» 812 
p. Tipper (1809), 2 Camp. 

72.. 808, 993, 1181 
Firmer, R. r. (1849), 2 C. <k K. 774 1043 
— - (1874), 12 Cox, 625 . . 800 
Firth, R. p. (1869), L. R. 1 C. C. R. 

172 . . 90, 807, 312, 436, 489 
Fish, R. r. (1900), 64 J. P. 137 . . 514 
Fisher r. Apollinaris Co. (1874), L. 

R. 10 Ch. App. 297. . 1090n 
— R. r. (1811), 2 Camp. 563 . . 146, 

997, 1095, 1281 

(1837), 8 C. A P. 182. . 794 

(1848), 8 Cox, 68 . . 201 

(1866;,L.R.1C.C.R.7 674, 

676 

(1899), 34 L. J. N. 100 395, 

911 
Fitch, R. r. (1857), Dears. & B. 187 460 

(1862), L. & C. 159 . . 739 

(1897), 61 J. P. 233 . . 1182 

Fitcaie, R. r. (1857), Dears. & B. 

176.. 71 9, 739 
Fivti r. Nicholls (1846), 2 C. B. 

501.. 1089n 
Fitzgerald, R. v. (1741), 1 Leacb, 20 725 

(1848), 1 C. 4 K. 

201 . . 124 
Fitzpatrick, R. r. (1823), R. & R. 

512.. 1042 
FitzSimons, R. r. (1869), Tr. Rep. 

4C. L. 1.. 718 
FitzWalter Peerage Claim (1843), 

10 CI. & F. 198 . . 383 
Fliherty, R. r. (1847), 2 C. & K. 

282 . . 1173 
Flsnagan, R. r. (1867), 10 Cox, 561 565 
Flaanagan, R. r. (1810), R. & R. 187 626 

(1884), 15 Cox, 408 124, 

309, 415 
Flannery, R. r. (1832), 1 Lewin, 183 248 
Flatman, R. r. (1880), 14 Cox, 396 459 
Flattenr, R. r. (1877), 2 Q. B. D. 410 884, 

909 910 
Fleet, R. r. (1818), 1 B. & Aid. 879 'l46, 

997 
Flemmins,R.r. (1799), 2 Leach, 854 377 
Fletcher, Ex parte (1844), IS L. J. 

(M.C.)67 876 
— R. r. (1742), 1 Leach, 28 1018 

(1829), 4 C. & P. 250 B88 

(1845), 2 C. &K.215 656 

(1«59), Bell, 63 . . 909 

(1862), L. A C. 180 584 



PAGE 

Fletcher, R. p. (1866), L. R. 1 C. C. R. 

39.. 909 

(1871), L. R. 1 C. C. R. 

820 . . 1047 

(1877), 2 Q. B. D. 43 289 

Fletcher r. Calthrop (1845), 6 Q. B. 

880 . . 1246, 1248 

— (P. O.) p. Crosbie (1842), 

2 M. & Rob. 417 . . 209 
Flewster r. Royle (1808), 1 Camp. 

187.. 896 
Flindt r. Atkins (1811), 3 Camp. 

215n . . 879 
Flint, R. r. (1786), Cas. (K. B.) 

temp. Hardw. 370 . . 73 

(1821), R. & R. 460 604, 606 

Flower, R. r. (1826), 8 D. & R. 612 560 

(1828), 3 C. & P. 413 99 

Flower p. Sadler (1881), 9 Q. B. D. 

83 . . 1090n 

— r. Shaw, 2 C. & K. 703 . . 714 
Flowers, R. r. (1886), 16 Q. B. D. 

643 . . 449 
Floyd p. Barker (1607), 12 Co. Rep. 

23 . . 103 
Flynn, R. r. (1868), 16 W. R. 319 

(fr.) . . 782 
Foakes v. Webb (1885), 28 Ch. d! 

287.. 401 

Foearty, R. v. (1850), 6 Cox, 101 . . 187 
Foley, R. r. (1889), 17 Cox, 142 

(/r.).. 436 

Foller, R. r. (1896), 60 J. P. 569 . . 320 
Folkes, R. v. (1832), 1 Mood. 354. .16, 907 
Fontaine-Moreau, R. r. (1848), 11 

Q. B. 1028 . . 1061 

Foote ». Havne (1824), Rv. <fe M. 165 401 

— R. p. '(1883), 10 Q.' B. D. 378 116, 

289 
Forbes p. Wale (1765), 1 W. Bl. 532 881 

— R. r. (1814), Holt (N. P.), 

699n . . 372 

(1823),2St.Tr.(N.S.) 

989,959.. 1101 

(1835),7C.AP.224.. 714 

(1866), 10 Cox, 362 . . 84, 863 

Forbes, Re (1887), 8 N. S. W. Rep. 

(Law) 68 . . 237, 240 
Ford, R. r. (1606), Yelv. 99 . . 102 

Kel. (J.) 51 .. ..796 

(1817), R. & R. 829 . . 807, 894 

(1833), 1 Nev. & M. 776 294 

(1851), 2 Den. 245 . . 422 

Forde r. Skinner (1830), 4 C. & P. 

239 . . 835 
Forester, R. p. (1866), 10 Cox, 368 321 , 

322 
Foregate, R. p. (1787), 1 Lencb, 403, 

464» . . 61 
Forster, R. p. (1825), 1 Lewin, 187 812, 

1033 
Forsyth, R. p. (1814), R. <fe R. 274 77, 

800, 350, 440, 701, 1144 

(1856), Dears. 456 721,975 

(1899), Chester Sum- 

mer Assizes . . 784, 886 



Jxxii 



Table of Cases. 



PACK 

Everingham r. Roundell (1888), 2 

M. A Rob. 138 . . 386 
Evett, R. r. (1827), 6 B. A C. 247. . 158 
Ewer v. Ambrose (1825), 8 B. A C. 

746 . . 868, 418 
Exall, R. r. (1866), 4 F. A F. 922. . 841 
Exeter (Treasurer), R. r. (1829), 5 

Man. A Rv. 167 . . 136, 257, 258 
Eyre, R. r. (1868), L. R. 8 Q. B. 

487 . . 38, 125 
Eyton, R. r. (1854), 3 E. A B. 390 1234 
Eyres, R. r. (1733), 2 Barnard. 2. r »0 148 



FABIAN'S CASE (1664), Kel. (J.) 

89 . . 619 
Fadermann (or Fadennan), R. r. 

(1850), 1 Den. 565 . . 165, 166, 168, 

275,280 
Fadennan, R. r. (1850), 4 Cox, 859 765 
Fagent, R. v. (1835), 7 C. 4 P. 238 822, 

324 
Fairlie, R. r. (1862), 9 Cox, 209 . . 1044, 

1072 
Fairman r. Ives (1822), 5 B. A Ad. 

642.. 996, 1132 
Fairrie, R. r. (1857), 8 Cox, 66 . . 1185 
Falkingham, R. r. (1870), L. R. 1 

C. C. R. 222 . . 875 
Falkner, R. r. (1822), R. A R. 481. . 838 
Fallon, R. r. (1862), L. A C. 217 . . 21, 

1306 
Fallows, R. r. (1882), 5 C. A. P. 608 527 

— r. Taylor (1798), 7 T. R. 

475.. 1090a 
Falmouth (Karl) r. Roberts (1842), 

9M. AW. 469.. 881 
Fanning, R. r. (1866), 10 Cox, 411 1176, 

1178 
Farler, R. r. (1837), 8 C. £ P. 106 391 
Farley, R. v. (1846), 1 Den. 197 . . 401 
Farmer r. Wilson (1900), 69 L. J. 

(Q. B.)496.. 1162 
Farmer's Case, Tremaine (PI. Cr.), 

197.. 620 
Farnborough, R. r. (1895), 2 Q. B. 

484.. 440 
Farnham, R. r. (1846), 1 Cox, 849 825 
Farquharson v. King (1902), A pp. 

Cas. 825 . . 268, 461 
Farr, R. r. (1839), 8 C. A P. 768 . . 418 

(1864), 4 F. A F. 836 . . 817 

Farre, R. r. (1665), Kel. (J.) 48 454, 

628 
Farrell, R. r. (1787), 1 Leach, 822n 

(6).. 528 

(1862), 9 Cox, 446 . . 1188 

(1874),L.R.2C.C.R. 

116.. 369 
Farrer, R. r. (1866), L. R. 1 Q. B. 

558.. 1210, 1211 
Farrington, R. r. (1811), R. A R. 

207 . . 303, 348, 655, 1010 
Farrow, R. r. (1867). Dears. A B. 

164 . . 828 



TAGS 

Faulkes, R. r. (1908), 19 T. L. R. 

250.. 1179 
Faulkner, R. r. (1877), 13 Cox, 650 

(/r.) . . 662, 659 

1 Wins. Saand. 248 

(6th ed.).. 94 

Faulkner t*. R. (1906), 21 T. L. R. 

417 . . 1815, 1316 
Fauntleroy, R. r. (1824), 1 Mood. 

62.. 727, 744 
Fawcott, R. r. (1793), 2 Eist, P. C. 

862 . . 703 
Fawle, R. r. (1726), 2 Ld. RavnV. 

1452.. 181 
Fav, R. r. (1872), Ir. Rep. 6 C. L. 

486.. 138 
Fearnlev, R. r. (1786), 1 Leach, 425 

93, 94, 162, 167, 1088 
Featherstone, R. r. (1854), Dean. 

369.. 277, 469 
Featherstone Riot Case, Pari. Pap. 

(1898-4, a 7234) . . 818, 1101 
Feist, R. r. (1868), Dears. A B. 590 1209 
Fellowes, R. r. (1843), 1 C. A K. 115 801 
Fellows, R. r. (1836), 1 Har. A Wol. 

648 131 
Fenlev, R. r. (1902), 20 Cox, 252*. " 48, 

49, 434 
Fenn r. Grafton (1836), 2 Bing. 

(N. C.) 617 . . 625, 627 
Fenna r. Clare (1895), 1 Q. B. 199 
Fennel], R. r. (1881), 2 Q. B. D. 147 881 
Fentiman, Ex parte (1834), 2 A. A 

E. 127.. 147 
Fenton, R. r. (1830), 1 Lewin, 179 799 
Ferens r. O'Brien (1883), 11 Q. B. D. 

21 . • 489 
Ferguson, R. r. (1830), 1 Lewin, 181 788 

(1845), 1 Cox, 241 736 

(1855), Dears. 427 89, 91 

Fernando*, Ex parte (1861), 10 

C. B. (N. S.)8..400, 895 

- R. r. (1861), 2 F. A F. 

862n . . 213 

Ferrall, R. r. (1850), 2 Den. 61 . . 1088 
Ferrand, R. r. (1819), 3 B. A Aid. 

260 . . 164, 155 
Ferrars Case (1664), Sir T. Raym. 

84.. 223m 
Ferrers (Earl), R. r. (1760). 19 St. Tr. 

885 . . 25 
Fem r Frvstone, R. r. (1801), 2 East, 

* " 54.. 371 

Fetzcr, R. r. (1900), 19 N. Z. L. R. 

438 . • G94 
Fidler, R. r. (1881), 4 C A P. 449. '. 676 
Field, R. r. (1785), 1 Leach, 388 . . 769 

(1892), Cent. Crim. Ct. 922 

Fieldbouse, R. v. (1775), 1 Cowp. 

825 . . 102 
Fielding, R. r. (1769), 2 Burr. 719 

140, 147 

(1848), 2 C. A K. 621 

809. 867 

Fielding r. Turner (1908), 1 K. B. ' 

867.. 1202 



T"Me of Cases. 



Ixiiii 



PAC« 

Fifehead, R. r. (1818), 3 Cos, 59 . . 1234 
Fikwood, R. c. (1787), 2T.R. 145 151 
Fmteane, B. r. (1833), 5 C. & P. 

551.. 866 
Fmdi, R. v. (1834), 1 Mood. 418 . . 492 
Finertr, R. r. (1801), 26 St. Tr. 901 

(/r.).. 989 
Fi&eax r. Horenden (1599), Cro. El. 

664.. 6 
Fmkelstein, R. r. (1886). 16 Cox, 107 720 
Fiiimore, R. r. (1799), 8 T. R. 409 137 
Finnertr, R. r. (1830), 1 Crawf. A 

" Dix.(Ir.Cire.Rep.)167« 812 
r. Tipper (1809), 2 Camp. 

72.. 308, 993, 1131 
Faner, R. r. (1849), 2C.4K. 774 1043 
— - (1874), 12 Cox, 625 . . 800 
Firth, R. v. (1869), L. R. 1 C. C. R. 

172 . . 90, 307, 312, 436, 439 
Fish, R. v. (1900), 64 J. P. 137 . . 514 
Tuber r. Apollinaris Co. (1874), L. 

R. 10 Ch. App. 297. . 1090n 
— R. r. (1811), 2 Camp. 563 . . 146, 

997, 1095, 1281 

(1837), 8 C. A P. 182. . 794 

(1848), 3 Cox, 68 . . 201 

(1866KL.R.1C.C.R.7 674, 

676 

(1899), 34 L. J. N. 100 395, 

911 
Fitch, R. r. (1857), Dears. 4 B. 187 460 

(1862), L. A C. 159 . . 739 

(1897), 61 J. P. 233 . . 1132 

Fitebie, R. r. (1857), Dears. A B. 

^ 175 . . 719, 739 

Fivaz r. Nicholla (1846), 2 C. B. 

501.. 1089n 
Fitzgerald, R. *. (1741), 1 Leacb, 20 725 

^ (1843), 1 C. A K. 

201.. 124 

Fifapatrick, R. v. (1823), R. A R. 
1 512 . . 1042 

FitzSimcras, R. r. (1869), Ir. Rep. 

4 C. L. 1 . . 718 
FifaWalter Peerage Claim (1843), 

10 CI. A F. 198 . . 383 

Fhberty, R. r. (1847), 2C.AK. 

282.. 1173 

Flanagan, R. r. (1867), 10 Cox, 561 565 

ilumagan, R. v. (1810), R. A R. 187 626 

~""2LJ (1884), 15 Cox, 403 124, 

309 415 
FUnnerj, R. r. (1832), 1 Lewin, 133 ' 248 
Flataan, R. r. (1880), 14 Cox, 896 459 
Flatter*, R. r. (1877), 2 Q. B. D. 410 834, 

909 910 

Fleet, R. r. (1818), 1 B. A Aid. 879 'l46, 

997 
Ftemming, R. r. (1799), 2 Leach, 854 377 
Fletcher, Ex parte (1844), 13 L. J. 
nrorer, y* (M. C.) 67 875 

- R. r. (1742), 1 Leacb, 23 1018 

(1829), 4 C. A P. 250 388 

(1845), 2 C. A K. 215 656 

(1859). Bell, 63 .. 909 

(1«») L- A C. 180 584 



PAGE 

Fletcher, R. v. (1866), L. R. 1 C. C. R. 

39 . . 909 

(1871),L.R.1C.C.R. 

820.. 1047 

(1877), 2 Q. B. D. 43 289 

Fletcher r. Calthrop (1845), 6 Q. B. 

880 . . 1246, 1248 

— (P. O.) v. Croebie (1842), 

2 M. A Rob. 417 . . 209 
Flewster v. Royle (1808), 1 Camp. 

187.. 896 
Flindt r. Atkins (1811), 3 Camp. 

215n . . 379 
Flint, R. r. (1736), Cas. (K. B.) 

temp. Hardw. 370 . . 73 

(1821), R. A R. 460 604, 606 

Flower, R. r. (1826), 8 D. A R. 512 560 

(1828), 3 C. A P. 413 99 

Flower v. Sadler (1881), 9 Q. B. D. 

83.. 1090n 

— r. Shaw, 2 C. A K. 703 .. 714 
Flowers, R. r. (1886), 16 Q. B. D. 

643 . . 449 
Floyd v. Barker (1607), 12 Co. Rep. 

23.. 103 
Flynn, R. v. (1868), 16 W. R. 319 

(/r.).. 782 
Foakes v. Webb (1885), 28 Ch. D. 

287.. 401 

Foffarty, R. v. (1850), 5 Cox, 161 . . 187 
Foley, R. r. (1889), 17 Cox, 142 

(/r.).. 436 

Follev, R. r. (1896), 60 J. P. 569 . . 320 
Folkea, R. v. (1832), 1 Mood. 354. .16, 907 
Fontaine-Horeau, R. r. (1848), 11 

Q. B. 1028 . . 1061 

Footet>.Hayne(1824),Rv.AM.165 401 

— R. v. (1883), 10 Q. B. D. 378 116, 

289 
Forbes v. Wale (1765), 1 W. Bl. 532 881 

— R. r. (1814), Holt (N. P.), 

599n . . 372 

(1823), 2 St. Tr. (N. S.) 

939,959.. 1101 

(1835), 7 CAP. 224.. 714 

(1865), 10 Cox, 362 . . 84, 863 

Forbes, Re (1887), 8 N. S. W. Rep. 

(Law) 68 . . 237, 240 
Ford, R. r. (1606), Yelv. 99 . . 102 

Kel. (J.) 51 . . . . 796 

(1817), R. A R. 829 . . 807, 894 

(1833), 1 Nev. A M. 776 294 

-- -- 422 

835 

321, 

322 

61 
812, 
1033 

77, 



(1851), 2 Den. 245 



Forde r. Skinner (1830), 4 C. A P. 

239 
Forester, R. r. (1866), 10 Cox, 368 

Forsgate, R. r. (1787), 1 Leicb, 403, 

464 m . . 
Forster, R. r. (1825), 1 Lewin, 187 



Forsyth, R. p. (1814), R. A R. 274 

800, 350, 440, 701, 1144 

(1855), Dears. 456 721,975 

(1899), Chester Sum- 

mer Assizes . . 784, 886 



lxxir 



Table of Cases. 



TAGR 

Fortuin, R. r. (1883), 1 Buchanan 

(Gape), 290.. 442 
Foster, R. r. (1821), R. d: R. 459 . . 1045* 

1071 

(1834), 6 CAP. 325.. 318 

(1836), 7 C. &P. 148.. 337 

(1836), 7 C. & P. 494. . 983 

(1836), 7 C. & P. 495. . 416, 

982 

(1848), 8 C. it K. 201.. 214 

( 1852), 6 Cox, 25 . . 676 

(1877), 2 Q.B.I). 301 604 

Fonlkes, R. r. (1851), 20 L. J.(M.C) 

196.. 131 

(1875), L. R.2C.C.R. 

150.. 561, 569 
Fountain, R. r. (1664), 1 Sid. 152. . 152 
Fowle, R. p. (1831), 4 C. & P. 592 1282 

— r. Fowle (1896), 18 Cox, 4C2 1164 
Fowler, R. p. (1821), 4 B. <fc Aid. 

273 295 
Fox, R. r. (1841), 2 Q. B. 246 .'.* 1085 

— r. R. (1806), 10 Cox, 502 (Ir.) 207, 

279 282 

— R. r. (1870), 19 W. R. 109 (Jr.) ' 814 
(1887), 16 Cox, 166 . . 1265 

Frampton, R. r. (1858), Dearr. & B. 

685.. 550 
Fiance, R. r. (1839), 2 M. A Rob. 

207 373 
Frances, R. r. (1849), 4 Cox, 57 . 1 28, 29 
Francin, R. r. (1717), 15 St. Tr. 897 337, 

838, 939 
Francis, R. r. (1735), 2 Str. 1015 . . 219, 

220,526 

(1811), R. A R. 209. . 713, 

(1874), L.R.2C.C.R. ' 

128. .311, 817, 615, 721 
Francklin, R. v. (1781), 17 St. Tr. 

625.. 847 
Frankland, R. p. (1863), L. A C. 276 66, 

664 
Franklin, R. p. (1883), 15 Cox, 163 783, 

800 
Franks, R. t>. (1794), 2 Leach, 644. . 974 
Franz, R. p. (1861), 2 F. <fe F. 680. . 781 
Fraser, R. r. (1834), 1 Mood. 407. . 1169 

(1834), 1 Mood. 419 . . 894 

(1896), Cent. Cr. Ct. . . 1110 

Fray, R. v. (1785), 1 East, P. C. 

236.. 794 
Frazer, R. r. (1797), M'Nallv, Ev. 

66 (/r.).. 393, 394 
Freikley, R. p. (1862), 6 Cox, 75 . . 139 
Freeman p. Arkell ( 1823-4), 2 B. & C. 

494.. 380 

— r. Jacob (1815), 4 Camp. 

209 . . 298 

— R. r. (1833), 6 C. & P. 634 664 

(1876), Ir. Rep. 9 C. 

L. 627 . . 1252 

(1895), 6 Queensland 

L. J. 281 . . 198n, 416n 
Freeman's Journal, R. v. (1902), 2 Ir. 

Rep. 82 . . 146, 1095 



TAG* 

606 
939 

60, 
628 

43 

740 
779 
831 
413 

1300 
£42 



Freeth, R. r. (1807), R. 4 R. 127 . . 
Freiod, R. p. (1698), 13 St. Tr. 1 , . 
French, R. r. (1822), R. & R. 491 . . 

(1859), 8 Cox, 252 .. 

(1870), L. R. 1 C. C. R. 

217.. 

(1879), 14 Cox, 328.. 

( 1902), 20 Cox, 200 . . 

Freston, Re (1883), 11 Q. B. D. 545 
Fretwell, R. r. (1862), L. k C. 161 

787, 

(1864), L. AC. 443.. 

Friar, R. r. (1819), 1 Chit. (K. B.) 

702.. 148 
Friel, R. r. (1890), 17 Cox, 325 . . , 177 
Friend, R. p. (180*), R. & R. 20 ..2, 784 
Frith p. Frith (1896), Prob. 74 . . 1170 
Fritz r. Hobson (1880), 14 Ch. D. 

542.. 1216 

Frost, Re (1888), 4 T. L. R. 757 . . 110 

— R. p. (1793), 22 St. Tr. 471... 998 

(1839), 4 St. Tr. (N. S.) 

85.. 187, 198,212,306,307, 
416, 941, 942, 943, 944, 1101 

(1855), Dears. 474 . . 57, 296, 

300 
Fraud, R. r. (1819), R. & R. 889 . . 713, 

717, 735 
Frowen, R. p. (1850), 4 Cox, 266 . . 631 
Fry, R. v. (1822), R. A R. 482 . . 77 

(1887), 2 M. <fc Rob. 42 . . 1249 

(1858), Dears. & B. 449. . 600 

Fuentes r. Montes (1868), L. R. 4 

P. C. 93 • . 582 
Fuidge, R. p. (1864), L. <fe C 390 .' .' 9, 

120 808 
Fullagar, R. p. (1879), 14 Cox, 370 '576, 

580m 
Fullarton, R. p. (1853), 6 Cox, 194 296 
Fuller, R. p. (1778), 2 East, P. C. 

498 . . G26 

(1797), 1 B. & P. 180 1295* 

(1798), 2 Leach, 790. . 69, 

79, 82, 1005 

(1816), R. & R. 308. . 3, 

310, 841, 348, 525, 980 

• (1836), 7 C. & P. 269 375 

Fulmerstonr. Steward (1553), Plowd. 

102 . 73n 
Ful wood's Case (1637), Cro. Car. 488 898 
Furley, R. p. (1844), 1 Cox, 76 . . 332 
Furly v. Newnham (1780), 2 Doug. 

419.. 412 
Furneaux, R. r. (1817), R. 4 R. 335 560 
Furnival, R. p. (1821), R. <fc R. 445 624 
Fursey, R. v. (1833), 3 St Tr. (N. S.) 

543. .386, 806, 1099, 1101, 1103 
Fusscll, R. t. (1848), 6 St. Tr. (N. S.) 

723. .89, 90, 92, 990, 991, 998, 1089 
Fuxil Deen, R. p. (1895), 6 Queens- 
land L. J. 802. . 398 



GABY. R. r. (1810), R. & R. 178 . . 61 
Gade, R. r. (1796), 2 Leach, 732 . . 743 



Table of Cases. 



lxxt 



PAOB 

Cadiorr, R. r. (1838), 8C.AT. 676 313, 

1320n 
Gainer, R. r. (1835), 7 C. ft P. 231 1248 
Gate, R. r. (1*77), 2 Q. B. D. 141 . . 570 
taUagher, R. r. (1875), 13 Cox, 61 394n, 

1289 

(1883), 15 Cox, 291 

(Jr.). .390, 391, 943, 961 
Gallard, E. r. (1733), 1 Seas. Cos. 

231.. 1188 
Galleon, K. r. (1849), Ben. 501 . .76, 439 
Galliard r. Laxton (1862), 2 B. ft S. 

363. .810, 864 
Gallons Caw, Fitz. Abr. Trial, 554 930 
Gam We, R. r. (1867), 10 Cox, 545 820 
feunlen, R. r. (1858), 1 F. ft F. SO 29 
GamJingav, R. r. (1790), 3 T. R. 513 1222 
Gannon. R. r. (1832), 5 C. ft P. 321 911 
Garbrtt, R. r. (1847), 1 Den. 236 329, 

399 
Gardener, R. r. (1833), 1 Mood. 390 809 
Gardiner, R. r. (1839), 2 Mood. 95 409, 

1056, 1061, 1064, 1067 
Gardner. R. r. (1811), 2 Camp. 513 350 

( 1824), 1 C. ft P. 479 525, 

537 

(1845), 1 C. ft K. 628 212m, 

511 

(1851), 5 Cox, 140 . . 247 

(1856), Dears, ft B. 

40. . 613 

(1859), 1 F. ft F. 669 781 

(1862), L. ft C. 243 446 

(1862), 9 Cox, 332 . . 339 

(1899), 1 Q. B. 150. . 208, 

211, 896 
Gardner r. Mansbridge (1887), 19 

Q. B. D. 207. . 701 
Garland, R. r. (1776), 1 Leach, 144 625 

(1851), 5 Cox, 164 . . 1183 

(1869), 11 Cox, 224 

(/r.). .275, 276 
Gamer, R. r. (1848), 1 Den. 329 . . 278, 

332 

(1864), 4 F. ft F. 346 309 

Garnet* r. Ferrand (1827), 6 B. ft C. 

611.. 838 

Garabam, R. r. (1861), 8 Cox, 451 438 

Garntt, R. v. (1834), 6 C. ft P. 369 477 

(1893;, 10 T. L. R. 

167. . 604 
Garrell* r. Alexander (1801), 4 

Esp. 37. . 388» 
Garrett, R. r. (1853), Dean. 232 . . 594, 

612 

(I860), 8 Cox, 868 . . 457 

Guode, B. r. (1834), 2 A. ft E. 266 132, 

890,779 

Gi/rer, J2. r. (1887), 16 Cox, 252 

(/r.). . 1265 

Cimfe* R. r. (J783£ 2 &£ 



(ate FulfortL R. r. (J 865), 6 Cox, 

(1&5G), Dean. 
* &B.74.. 



525 
130 
278 



PAGE 

Gathered*, R. r. (1838), 2 Lewin, 

237. .1022, 1128 
Gaunt, R. r. (1895), 18 Cox, 210 . . 831, 

833 
Gauntlet, The (1872), L. R. 4 P. C. 

184.. 955 
Gavin, R. r. (1885), 15 Cox, 656 . . 336 
Gay, R. r. (1835), 7 C ft P. 230 .. 324 
Gayer, R. r. (1757), 1 Burr. 246 . .1251» 
Gayford r. Chouler (1898), 1 Q. B. 

316.. 701 
Gaylor, R. r. (1857), Dears, ft B. 

288. .18, 787, 1303 
Gazard, R. r. (1838), 8 C. ft P. 595 1060 
Geach, R. r. (1840), 9 C. ft P. 499. . 199, 

206,718 
Geary, R. v. (1689), 2 Salk. 630 . . 225 
Geering, K. r. (1849), 18 L. J. (M. 

C.) 215 . . 308, 809 
Geery r. Hopkins (1702), 2 Ld. 

Raym. 851 ..357, 412 
George, R. r. (1841), C. ft Mar. Ill 394a 

(1868), 11 Cox, 41 .. 825 

(1900), 65 J. P. 729 . . 268, 

615 
George, Ex parte (1S97), 18 Cox, 

631.. 457 
Gerard's Case (1777), 2 W. Bl. 1123 1251a 
Gerrans, R. r. (1876), 13 Cox, 158 100 
Gerrish, R. r. (1839), 2 M. ft Rob. 

219. .706, 960, 976 
Gibbon, R. r. (1862), L. ft C. 109 . . 1048, 

1050 

— r. Pepper (1696), 1 Ld. 

Raym. 32. . 836 
Gibbons, R. r, (1752), Fost. Cr. L. 

107.. 638 

(1812), R. ft R. 442 C25, 

630 

(1828), 1 C. ft P. 97 882 

Gibbs v. Pike (1841), 8 M. ft W. 223 80 

— R. v. (1722), 1 8tr. 497 . . 620 

(1855), Dears. 445. .462, 466, 

562, 584 
Gibson r. Barton (1875), L. R. 10 

Q. B. 829. . 590 

— r. Lawson (1891), 2 Q. B. 

545.. 1158, 1159, 1161 

— R. p. (1785), 1 Leach, 857. . 627 
(1806), 8 East, 107 164, 167 

(1842), C. ft Mar. 672 423 

(1861), 8 Cox, 486 .. 566 

(1886), 18 Q. B. D. 

537. .276, 291, 296, 407 
Giddins, R. r. (1842), C. ft Mar. 634 82, 

528 
Gilbert, R. r. (1828), 1 Mood. 185. . 
(1843), 1 C. ft K. 84 



451 
646 

137 



Gilbie, R. v. (1816), 5 M. ft Sel. 520 
Gilchrist v. Gardiner (1891), 12 

N. 3. W. Rep. (Law) 184 141 
— R. r. (1795), 2 Leach. 657 802 

(1841), C. ft Mar. 

224. .502, 782, 735 
Giles, R. r. (1827), 1 Mood. 166.. 12, 720, 

724 



IXXYI 



Table of Case*. 



TAGS 

Giles, R. r. (1865), L. ft C. 602 599, 600, 

604 

(1895) (unreported) .. 186 

Gilgannon, R. r. (1899), 63 J. P. 457 522 
Gilliam, R. r. (1795), 1 Rip. 285 .. 406 

(1828), 1 Mood. 186, 

208. .833, 402 
Gilkes, R. r. (1827), 8 C. A P. 52. . 1088 

(1828), 8 B. ft C. 439 861, 

1088 
Gill, R. r. (1718), 1 Str. 190 . . 836 

(1818), 2 B. 4 Ad. 204. .70, 71, 

281, 596, 1282, 1283, 1285, 
1289, 1292 

(1821), 1 Archb. Peel's 

Acts, 802. . 537 

(1854), Dears. 289 .. 569 

Gillbrass, R. r. (1836), 7 C. ft P. 444 261 
Gilles, R. v. (1820), R. ft R. 366m. . 1208, 

1209 
Gillham, R. r. (1795), 6 T. R. 265. . 1084 
Gilli*, R. r. (1866), 11 Cox, 69 . . 832 
Gillow, R. t\ (1825), 1 Mood. 85 303, 841 
Gilmore, R. r. (1882), 15 Cox, 85. . 172, 

690, 855 
Giorgettt, R. r. (1865), 4 F. ft F. 

546. .198, 204 
Girdwood, R. v. (1776), 1 Leach, 142 44, 

532, 536, 1117 
Gisson, R. r. (1847), 2 C. ft K. 781 912 
Glamorgan Coal Co. v. South Wales 
Miners' Federation (1903), 1 K. B. 

545. .1160, 1281 
Glandlield, R. r. (1791), 2 East, 

P. C. 1034. . 654 
Glass, R. r. (1847), 1 Den. 215 ; 2 

C. ftK. 895.. 610 
Glen, R. r. (1897), 9 Queensland 

L. J. 140. . 29n 
Glenn, R. r. (1820), 8 B. ft Aid. 373 121 
Glossop, R. r. (1821), 4 B. ft Aid. 

616. . 299 
Gloster, R. r. (1888). 16 Cox, 471 821, 322 
Gloucestershire, R. r. (1836), 4 A. 

ft E. 689. . 36 

(1842), C. ft 

Msr. 506. . 1239 
Glover, R. r. (1814), R. ft R. 269 . . 477, 

478 

(1864), L. <b C. 466 468,565 

Glover r. Hynde (1674), 1 Mod. 168 838 
Glubb r. Edwards (1840), 2 M. ft 

Rob. 300. . 381 
Glvde, R. r. (1868), L. R. 1 C. C. R. 

189.. 445 
Gnosil, R. r. (1824), 1 CAP. 304, 

805n. .524, 626 
Goate, R. r. (1700), 1 Ld. Raym. 737 718 
Goddard r. Smith (1704), 8 Salk. 

245.. 141 

- R. r. (1708), 2 Ld. Raym. 

920. .83, 174 

(1R6I), 2F. ftF. 861 1060 

(1882), 15 Cox, 7 318, 

321 

(1896), 60 J. P. 491 835 



VXQK 

Godfrey, R. r. (1858), Dears, ft B. 

426. .72, 
Godsen v. Dartford Justices (1897), 

62 J. P. 104.. 830 

Goff r. Bybv (1598), Cro. Elix. 540 17 

— R. r. (i810), R. ft R. 179 . .44, 45 

Goffe, R. v. (1672) . 1 Vent 216 . . 812 

Gogarty r. R. (1849), 8 Cox, 306 

(Ir.) . . 1007 
Gogerly, R. r. (1818), R. ft R. 343 12, 

807, 1299 
Going, R. «•., Rowe (Ir. K. B.) 563 147 
Golding, R. r. (1693), 12 St. Tr. 

1269. .541, 544 
Goldsbede, R. r. (1844), 1 C. ft K. 

657.. 329 
Goldsmid v. Bromer (1798), 1 Hagg. 

Consist Rep. 824.. 1172 
Goldsmith, R. r. (1873), LR.2C. 

C. R. 74 . .79, 84, 85, 
165, 280, 596 

(1878), 12 Cox, 

594.. 268, 270 
Goldstein r. Fobs (1827), 6 B. ft C. 

154.. 1130 
~ R. r. (1822), R. ft R. 473 75, 

717, 765 
Goldthorpe, R. r. (1841), C. ft Mar. 

835.. 825 
Gomez Serra r. Mnnez (1727), 2 Str. 

821.. 389 

Gompertz, R. r. (1847), 9 Q. B. 824 281, 

298, 1282, 1283, 1285, 1289 

Gooch, R. r. (1838), 8 C. ft P. 293 492, 

493 
Good, R. v. (1842), 1 C. ft K. 185. . 1307 
Goodall (or Goodchild), R. o. (1846), 

1 Den. 187.. 828 
Goodbodv, R. v. (1838), 8 C. A P. 

665.. 563 
Goodchild, R. v. See Goodall. 
Goode, R. r. (1837), 7 A. ft E. 536 184 
[1842), C. ft Mar. 582 461 
y 1842), 1 C. ft K. 185 32 
[1853), 6 Cox, 818 .. 826 
Gooden, R. r. (1871), 11 Cox, 672. . 789 
Goodfellow, R. r. (1842), C. ft Mar. 

569. .1056, 1060, 1061, 
1068, 1067 

(1846), 1 Den. 81 1247, 

1249 

(1879), 14 Cox, 

326.. 370 
Goodhall, R. r. (1821), R. ft R. 461 599 
Goodier r. Lake (1737), 1 Atk. 446 382 
Goodman, R. r. (1859), 1 F. ft F. 

502.. 1265 
Goodrich, Tie (1904), Prob. 138 . . 353 
Goodrtght c. Moss (1777), 2 Cowp. 

591.. 380, 402 
Goodtitlc r. Braham (1791), 4 T. R. 

497. .883, 715 

— r. Clavton (1768), 4 Burr. 

2224., 382 

— r. Lammiman (1809), 2 

Camp. 274. . 299 



Table of Cam. 



Ixrrii 



PACK 

Goodtitle r. Walter (1812). 4 Taunt 

671 299 
Goodwin, R. p. (1867), 10 Cox] 

534.. 978 
Goose's Case (1598), Moore, 461 .. 17 
Gorbntt, K. r. (1856), Dean. 4 B. 

166. .171, 434, 561, 571 
Gordon r. Cann (1899), 68 L. J. 

(Q. B.) 434. . 1245 

— R. r. (1746), 1 Bast, P. G. 

71. .30, 944 

(1781), 21 St. Tr. 485 318, 

347, 940, 943, 1100, 1101 

(1787), 22 St. Tr. 175 143, 

991 

(1789), 1 Leach, 515 16, 

844, 806, 811, 1097, 1804 

(1803), R. 4 R. 48 . . 47, 

1169 

(1804), 3 Ron. Cr. 

(6th ed.) 255. . 898 
(1842), C. 4 Mar. 410 862 

(1843), 12 L. J. (M. 

C.)84.. 415 

(1389), 23 Q. B. D. 

854. .607, 617 
Gore, K. r. (1611), 9 Co. Rep. 81 . . 799 
Gorge, R. r. (1696), 8 Salk. 189 . . 6 
Gorton r. Dyson (1819), 1 B. & B. 

219 S65 
Goss, R. v. (1860), Bell, 208 . . 602, 603 
Goatling, Ex parte (1886), 54 L. T. 

646. . 8 
Gotley, R. v. (1805), R. 4 R. 84 . . 1094 
Gough, R. v. (1781), 2 Dong. 791 . . 44 

(1831), 1 M. 4 Rob. 

71.. 580 
Gonld r. Jones (1762), 1 W. Bl. 

884.. 883 

- R. r. (1704), 1 Salk. 381 . . 1068 

(1768), 8 Burn's J. (30th 

ed.)98.. 224 

(1780), 1 Leach, 217 . . 643 

(1840), 9 C. A P. 864. . 836, 

341 
Gorer, R. it. (1863), 9 Cox, 282 .. 981 
Governor (J.), R. r. (1900), 21 N. S. 

W. Rep. 279. .109», 177n 
Gowen, R. r. (1786), 1 Leach, 248» 654 
Grady, R. v. (1836), 7 C. A P. 650 876 
Graham, R. r. (1778), 2 East, P. C. 

945.. 735 

(1791), 2 Leach, 547 67, 

80 In 

(1887), 2 Lewin, 97 1175 

(1875), 18 Cox, 57 468,575 

(1888), 16 Cox, 420 1098, 

1102 

(1901), 65 J. P. 248 248 

GnnateUi, R. r. (1849). 7 St. Tr. 

(N. S.)979.. 953 
Grand. R. r. (1903), 8 N. S. W. 

State Rep. 216. . 224 
Grant, R. v. (1848), 7 St. Tr. (N. S.) 

507. .991 
(1865), 4 F. A F. 822. . 655 



PAGE 

Graves (Lord), R. r. (1887), 4 St 

Tr. (N. S.) 609«. .164, 182 
Gray v. Milner (1819), 8 Taunt 739 729 

— R. v. (1885), 7 C. 4 P. 164 . .16, 89, 

907 

— r. R. (1844), 6 St. Tr. (N. S.) 

117. .198, 200, 281, 295 

— R. r. (1864), L. 4 C. 865 . .78, 675 

(1865), 10 Cox, 184 (/r.) 996, 

1096 

1866), 4 F. 4 F. 1098. . 802 

1866), 4 F. A F. 1102 310,653 

1891), 17 Cox, 299 . .221, 611 

(1900), 2 Q. B. 36 . .146, 1094 

(1903), 68 J. P. Rep. 40 277 

(1903), 22 N. Z. L. R. 

62. .1078, 1079 

(1904), 68 J. P. Rep. 

827 913 
Great Bolton, R. r. (1828), 8 B. 4 C. 

71.. 627 
Great Broughton, R. v. (1771), 5 

Burr. 2700. . 1225 
Great Canfield, R. r. (1810), 6 Esp. 

136 . . 1221 
Great North of England Rail. Co., 

R. v. (1846), 9 Q. B. 316 . . . . 11 
Great West Laundrv Co., R. v, 

(1900), 18 Manitoba, 66. . 11 
Great Western Rail. Co. (Directors), 

R. r. (1888), 20 Q. B. D. 410 . . 159 
Greathead, R. r. (1878), 14 Cox, 

108.. 614 
Greaves r. Greaves (1872), 41 L. J. 

(P. 4 M.) 66. . 1176 

- ». Keene (1879), 4 Ex. D. 

73. .892, 893 
Green e. Duckett (1888), 11 Q. B. D. 

275. .1114 

— v. Goddard, 2 Salk. 641 . . 888 

— r. Green (1893), Prob. 89 . . 1179 

— R. r. (1832), 5 C. 4 P. 312 . . 884 

(1835), 7 C. 4 P. 166 . . 802 

(1852), 8 C. 4 K. 209 . . 721 

(1864), Dears. 323 . . 598 

(1856), Dears. 4 B. 113 69, 

172 

(1861), 8 Cox, 441 . . 1305 

(1862), 8 F. 4 F. 274 . . 901 

(1899), 34 L. J. N. 622 1169 

Greenacre, Ex parte (1837), 8 C. 4 

P. 32. . 376 
— R. r. (1837), 8 C. 4 P. 

35. .781, 1307 
Greenhalgb, R. r. (1854), Dears. 

267. . 612 
Greenhow, R. p. (1876), 1 Q. B. D. 

703.. 1224 
Greenif, R. r. (1785), 1 Leach, 98», 

863. . 1030 
Greenland, R. r. (1866), L. R. 1 

C. C. R. 65. . 1045 
Greenough v. Eccles (1859), 5 C. B. 

(N. S.)786.. 418 
Greenslade, R. r. (1870), 11 Cox, 

412.. 415 



Ixxvili 



Table of Casei. 



PACK 

Greeuwich(DistrictBoard of Works) 
r. Maudsley (1870), L. R.5Q. B. 

397. . 1224 
Greenwood, R. r. (1846), 2C.4K. 

839.. 529 

(1852), 2 Den. 453 16, 

975 

(1857), 7 Cox, 404 779, 

798 
Greenwood r. Backhouse (1902), 20 

Cox, 196 . . 35 
Gregg, R. r. (1708), 14 St. Tr. 

1371.. 946 
Gregory, It. r. (1697), 1 Salk. 872 144 
- — • (1836), 5 B. k Ad. 

555.. 4, 1217 

(1845), 7Q. B. 274 36 

(1846), 8 Q. B. 608 56, 57 

Gregurv r. R. (1850), 15 Q. B. 957 . . 231, 

232, 281, 284 

— R. r. (I860), 2F. A F. 153 803 

(1866), L. R. 1 C. C. R. 

77 . . 8, 18, 19. 1293 
Gregory r. Taverner (1833), 6 C. k 

P. 280 . . 421 
Grellier r. Neale (1792), Peake, 146 380 
Greswoldu r. Kemp (1842), C. k 

Mar. 685.. 346 
Grevil, R. r. (temp. Eliz.), 1 Ander- 
son, 194 . . 1393 
Grey (Lord), R. v. (1682), 9 St. Tr. 

127 . . 922, 1279 
— R. r. (1666), Kel. (J.) 64 .. 795 

(1734), 2 East, P. C. 

708.. 526 

(1864), 4 F. k F. 78 . . 1191 

Grice, R. r. (1837), 7 C. 4 P. 803 . . 1249 
Griepe, R. r. (1698), 1 Ld. Raym. 

256 . . 1048 
Griffin, R. r. (1809), R. k R. 151 ! ! 336 

(1853), 6 Cox, 219 . . 402 

(1869), 11 Cox, 402 . . 796 

(1879), 14 Cox, 808 

(/r.)..1171, 1176 
Griffith, R. r. (1824), 1 C. k P. 298 817 

— Re (1878), 12 Ch. D. 665 . . 558 

— r. Taylor (1876), 2 C. P. D. 

194, 202 . . 48 

— r. Williams (1830), 1 Cr. k 

J. 47 . . 383n 
Griffiths r. Payne (1839), 11 A. A £. 

131 721 

— R. ». (1833), 8 C. 4 P. 248 840 

(1841), 9 C. k P. 746 423 

(1858), Dears. k B. 

548.. 740 

(1891), 2 Q. B. 145 . . 1137 

Griffits r. I very (1810), 11 A. k E. 

322 . . 883n 
Griggs, R. v. (1660), Sir T. Ravm. I 398 
Grimes, R. r. (1752), 2 East, P. C. 

647.. 519 

(1894), 15 N. S. W. 

Rep. (Law) 209.. 785 
Grim wade, R. v. (1844), 1 Den. 80 583, 

1116, 1117 



I PAQI 

Grim wood, R. r. (1815), 1 Price, 

369.. 292 

(1896), 60 J. P. 

809 . . 175, 222 
Grindlev, R. r. (1819), 1 Ross. Cr. 

(6th ed.) 144 . . 29 
GrisseU, Re (1879), 12 Ch. D. 484 . . 1 145 
Groenvelt r. Burrell (1698), 1 Ld. 

Raym. 252 . . 328 
Groombridge, R. r. ( 1886), 7 C. * P. 

582 . . 22, 907 
Grosvenor, U. r. (1745), 2 Sir. 1193 148 

(1819), 2 Stark. 

(S. P.) 511.. 1219 
Grout, R. r. (1831), 6 C. k P. 629 . . 801 
Grove. R. r. (1885). 7 C. ft P. 635 . . 573 
Grover, R. r. ( 1840), 8 Dowl. Pr. Cas. 

325.. 131 
Gnmceli, R. r. (1839), 9 C. 4 P. 

365 . . 442, 44tt 
Gryntfton, R. r. (1559) . . . . 94G 
Guelder, R. r. (1860), Bell 284 . . 571 
Guerchv, R. r. (1765), 1 W. Bl. 545 140 
Guernsey, R. r. (1858), 1 F. k F. 

394.. 440 
Guerrier, Re, Ex parte Leslie (1882), 

20 Ch. D. 131 . . 264 
Guinea, R. r. (1811), Ir. Circ. Rep. 

167.. 418 
Gully, R. r. (1773), 1 Leach, 98 . . 178 
Gumble, R. r. (1872), L. R. 2 C. C. R. 

1 . • 77 297 
GunneU,R.r. (1886), 16 Cox, 154*. *317 f 

497 
Gurney r. Lan glands (1822), 5 B. k 

Aid. 830.. 888, 715 
— R, r. (1867), 10 Cox, 650 . . 108a 

(1869), 11 Cox, 414 . . 207, 

1280 
Gutch, R. o. (1829), M. k M. 488, 

488n..998, 1133 
Guthrie, R. c. (1870), L. R. 1 C. C. R. 

241 . . 217, 917, 918 
Guttridge, R. r. (1840), 9 C. k P. 

228.. 115, 124, 320 

(1840), 9 C. k P. 

471.. 820 
Guy, R. v. (1902) (unreported) . . 658 
Gwyn, R. t\ (1720), 1 Str. 401 . . 857 
Gyles p. Hill (1809), 1 Camp. 471n 846, 

859 



HADDOCK, R. r. (1787), Andr. 137, 

145.. 81, 1221 

Hadfield, R. r. (1800), 27 St Tr. 

1281 . . 25, 183 

(1870), L. R. 1 

C. C. R.258.. 690 

(1886), 16 Cox, 148 

1048, 1066 
Hadwen, R. r. (1902), 1 K. B. 882 . . 211, 

893, 395, 899, 419 

Hagan, R. r. (1837), 8 C. k P. 167 . . 793 

(1873), 12 Cox, 357 . . 309 



Table of Case*. 



hxix 



TAGS 

Hague, R. r. (1863), 33 L. J. (M. C.) 

81.. 1265 
Hailer, R. r. (1824), 1 C. & P. 268 1065 
Haines, R. r. ( 1821 ), R. k R. 451 . . 632 

(1847), 2 C. &K.368 800, 

802,803 
262 
366 



(1850), 5 Cox, 114 



Bains, R. r. (1696), Comb. 337 
Haire r. Wilson (1829), 9 B. k C. 

643.. 1123 
Hake, R. r. (1827), 4 Han. 4 Kv. 

488nl. 1112 
Hale, R. r. (1846), 2 C. k K. 826 . . 474 

(1905), 1 K. B. 126 . . 884 

Hales, R. r. (1729), 2 Str. 816 . . 139 
Hall r. Ball (1841), 3 Scott (N. R.), 

477.. 386 

— r. Cox (1899), 1 Q. B. 198 . . 1207 

— r. McWillUm (1901), 20 Cox, 

33.. 1207 

— R. r. (1720), 1 Str. 416 . . . . 1022 

(1776), 2 W. Bl. 1110 . . Ill, 

414, 1078 

(1786), 1 T. R. 320 . . 80 

(1790), 2 Leach, 559 .. 332 

(1818), R. k R. 355 .. 632 

(1821), R. k R. 463 .. 578 

(1822), 1 B. it C. 123 . . 1251 

(1828), 3 C. k P. 409 440, 627 

(1836), 1 Mood. 474 .. 563 

(1838), 8 C. k P. 358 .. 318 

(1848), 1 Den. 381 . . 441 

(1S57), 1 F. k F. 33 . . 1280 

(1872), 12 Cox, 159 . . 380, 717 

(1875), 13 Cox, 49 . . 567 

(1891), 1 Q. B. 747 . . 5, 120 

Hall'a Estate, Re (1858), 22 L. J. 

(Ch.) 177 . . 879, 1170 
HaUard, R. v. (1796), 2 East, P. C. 

498.. 626 
Hallett, B. r. (1841), 9 C. k P. 748 422, 

908 

(1851), 2 Den. 237 . . 280, 

1046 
Hallidar, R. r. (1889), 61 L. T. 701 785, 

823,845 
HallWrell v. Co an sell ( 1878), 38 L. T. 

176.. 795 
Hallowav, K. r. (1628), Cro. Car. 

131.. 793 

(1823), 1 C. k P. 

127 . . 48, 76 
Halloo, R. r. (1824), Ry. k M. 78 . . 183 
Hamilton, B. r. (1784), 1 Leach, 348 648 

(1836), 7 C. k P. 

448.. 71 

(1837), 8 C. k P. 49 626, 

530,648 

(1848), 1 C. k K. 

212.. 534 
Hamilton r. R. ( 1848), 9 Q. B. 271 . . 79, 

596, 602, 608, 611 
— R. r. (1849), 7 St. Tr. (N. 

8.) 1130.. 952 

(1899), 12 Manitoba, 

507.. 242 



Hamilton, R. r. (1901), 1 K. B. 740 23«, 

70-1 
Hamlvn, R. r. (1816), 4 Camp. 379 1085 
Hammack r. White (1862), 31 L. J. 

(C. P.) 131 . . 800 
Hammersmith Rail. Co. r. Brand 

(1869), L.R.4H. L. 171 . . 1185 
Hammersmith, R. r. (1816), 1 Stark. 

(N. P.) 857 . . 1225 
Hammon, R. r. (1812), R. k R. 221 462 
Hammond, R. v. (1787), 1 Leach, 

444 . . 31, 533 

(I799),2Esp.719 1288 

(1844), 1 Cox, 60 653 

Hammond r. Stewart (1722), 1 Str. 

510.. 411, 413 
Hamp, R. r. (1852), 6 Cox, 167 . . 1078, 

1281 
Hampton, R. r. (1830), 1 Mood. 255 716 
Hamworth R. v. (1731), 2 Str. 900 . . 131 
Hancock r. Somes (1859), 1E.AE. 

796.. 175 

— r. Winter ( 1816), 7 Taunt. 

205.. 808 

— R. r. (1807), R. k R. 170 646 

(1878), 14 Cox, 119 663 

Handcock r. Baker (1800), 2 B. k P. 

260 • • 796 894 
Handford, Re (1899), 1 Q. B. 566 . . U45 
Handle?, R. v. (1838), 6 C. k P. 665 1247 

(1841), C. k Mar. 547 442 

(1859), 1 F. k F. 648 900 

(1874), 13 Cox, 79 . . 785, 

786 826 
Hands, R. r. (1887), 16 Cox, 188 . . ' 456 
Hankey, R. r. (1757), 1 Burr. 816 . . 149 
Hankins, R. r. (1824), McCl. <fc Y. 

27.. 117, 118 

(1849), 2 C. k K. 823 401 

Hanks, R. r. (1828), 8 C. k P. 419 1045 
Hann, R. r. (1765), 8 Burr. 1716 . . 147 
Hannan r. Mockett (1824), 2 B. k C. 

984.. 439 
Hannon, R. r. (1837), 9 C. k P. 11 765 
Hanson, R. r. (1850), 2 C. k K. 912 248, 

835,847 
Hanway r. Boultbee ( 1 830), 4 C. k P. 

350.. 694 
Hapgood, R. r. (1870), L. R. 1 C. C. R. 

221.. 219, 911, 1295 
Hardcastle r. South Torks. Rail. Co. 

(1859), 4 H. AN. 67.. 1186 
Hardie, R. r. (1821), 1 St. Tr. (N.S.) 

609.. 940, 1101 
Harding, R.r. (1690), 2 Vent. 315 939,946 

(1807), R. k R. 125 461 

Harding r. Cooper (1816), 1 Stark. 

(N. P.) 467 . . 1090» 

— v. Stokes (1887), 2M. k W. 

238.. 1261 
Hardwick, R. r. (1811), 1 Phil. Ev. 

(7th ed) 111.. 332 

— r. Lane (1904), 1 K. B. 

204.. 1207 
Hardy, R. r. (1794), 24 St. Tr. 199 213, 

306, 402, 420, 988, 940 



Ixxx 



Table of Ca$e$. 



PACK 

Hardv, R. r. (1871). L. R. I C. C. R. 

278.. 690 
Hare, R. r. (1876), 18 Cox, 174 . . 409, 

1061 
Hargrove r. Le Breton (1769), 4 

Burr. 2422.. 1182 
— R. r. (1831), 5 C. A P. 170 

391 790 
Hargreave v. Spink (1892), 1 Q. B. ' 

25.. 269 
Harkneas and AUsop, TU (1898), 2 

Ch. 368 . . 773 
Harland, R. v. (1838), 8 A. A E. 826 1112 
Harley, R. r., Car. Supp. 254 . . 1176 

(1830), 4 C. A P. 369 12, 

816, 828 

(1843), 1 C. * K. 89 . . 612 

Harman, R. r. (1620), 1 Hale, P. C. 

534.. 526 

Rowe (Ir. K. B.) 

441.. 148 
Harmar r. Davis (1817), 7 Taunt 

677.. 359 

Harmer, R. r. (1848), 2 Cox, 487 . . 340 
Harmwood, R. r. (1787), 1 East, P.C. 

440 . . 91 1 

Harney, R. r. (1850), 4 Cox, 441 ." ! 870 

Harper, R. r. (1880), 7 Q. B. D. 78 729 
Harpur, R. r. (1696), 5 Mod. 96,. . 73, 1251 
Harratt r. Wise (1829), 9 B. A C. 

712.. 350 

Harric, R. r. (1833), 6 C. A P. 105 533 

Harries, R. v. (1811), 13 East, 270 . . 149 
Harrington v. Fry (1824), Ry. A M. 

90.. 388 

- R. r. (1866), 10 Cox, 870 794 
Hums r. Briaco ( 1886), 17 Q. B. D. 

504.. 1080 

— v. Mobbs (1877), 8 Ex. D. 

278 . . 1216 

— r. Saunders (1825), 4 B. A C. 

411.. 879 

— r. Tippett (1811), 2 Camp. 687 404 

— R. r. (1753), 2 East P. C. 

1028.. 654 

(1762), 3 Burr. 1880., 138 

(1776), 1 Leach. 185.. 964 

(1791), 4 T. R. 202 . . 4, 5 

(1795), 2 Leach, 701.. 626 

(1822), 6 B. A Aid. 926 

409, 1056 

(1881), 6 C. A P. 159 818 

(1888), 8 C. A P. 129 708 

(1886), 7 C. 4 P. 416, 

428, 430 . . 717, 720, 765 

[1886), 7 C. A P. 446 815 
1836), 7 C. A P. 581 415 
1842), 1 C. A K. 179 734 
1842), C. A Mar. 661 671 
1844), 1 Cox, 106 . . 885 
1849), 4 Cox, 21 .. 272 
1854), Dears. 344 . . 670 
1864), 4 F. A F. 342 653 
(1866), 10 Cox, 352.. 1207 
(1871),L.R.1C.C.R. 

282.. 1188 



TAOK 

Harris, R. r. (1^7), 13 Cox, 75 . . 653 

(1893), 17 Cox, 656 . . 662, 

667 

(1897), 61J. P. 792.. 184 

(1900), 64 J. P. 360 . . 10 

Harrison r. Bush (1855), 5 E. A B. 

344 . . 1132 

— r. Hodgson (1830), 10 fi! 

AC. 445.. 838 

— r. Southwark, etc., W. W. 

Co. (1891), 2 Ch. 409 1184 

— R.r.(166l),6St.Tr.l008 989 

(1692), 12 St. Tr. 833 871 

(1756), 1 Leach, 47.. 459 

(1794), 6 T. R. 60 . . 150 

(1864), 9 Cox, 603 . . 106O 

Harrod, R. r. (1846), 2 C. A K. 294 178 
Hart r. Gumpach (1872), L. R. 4 

P.C. 439.. 1132 
— R. r. (1772), 1 W. Bl. 386 . . 1132 

(1776), 1 Leach, 45 . . 74, 

802,717 

(1796), 30 St. Tr. 1131, 

1334 . . 1059 
Hart (Mi liter), R. r. (1833), 6 C. A 

P. 106 . . 
(1836), 7 CAP. 652 



501 
714 

72 



Hart, R. v. (1904), 68 J. P. Rep. . . 
Hartall, R. r. (1836), 7 C. A P. 

475.. 
Hartel, R. r. (1837), 7 C. A P. 773 
Hartford, R. o. (1779), 1 Cowp. Ill 1222 
Hartley t\ Hindmaran (1866), L. R. 

1 C. P. 668 . . 

— R. r. (1807), R. A R. 189 . . 
Hartahorne, R. r. (1853), 6 Cox, 895 

— r. Watson (1889), 5 

Bing. (N. C.) 477 . . 

Harvey v. Farnie (1883), 8 App. 

Cas.43.. 1179 

— v. Morgan (1816), 2 Stark. 



90 

207 



176 
665 
703 

887 



(N. P.) 17 . . 1090* 
R. D. C. (1908), 2 



«— r. Truro 

Ch. 688 . . 1217, 1223, 1225 
— R. v. (1787), 1 Leach, 467 447 

(1812), R. A R. 267 . . 789 

(1823), 2 St. Tr. (N. 

S.) 1..143, 145, 848. 
718, 990, 991, 1123, 1180 

(1840), 9 C. A P. 853 461 

(1868), 8 Cox, 99 ..1056, 

1060 

(1869), 11 Cox, 646 . . 888, 

419, 715 

(1870), L. R. 1 C. C. 

R. 284 . . 79, 80, 750, 988 
Harwood, R. v. (1788), 2 Str. 1088 227 
Haalam, R. r. (1786), 1 Leach, 418 890, 

660 

(1845), 1 Den. 73 . . 1265 

Haslemere, R. v. (1862), 8 B. A S. 

813 . . 1284 
Haasall, R. v. (1826), 2 C. A P. 434 88 

(1861), L. A C. 58 . . 457 

HaaseU, R. v. (1887), 5 Dowl. 531 . . 187 
Hastie, R. p. (1863), L. A C. 269 . . 661 



Table of Cases. 



lxxxi 



l'AGB 

Hastings, R. r. (1835), 7 C. «fc 1*. 

152 . . 391 
Haswell, R. r. (1790), I Dong. 387 145, 

146, 150 

(1821), R- ± R. 458 1037 

Biftfald r. Phillip* (1815), 12 CI. 

&P. 343.. 578 
Hatftdd, R. r. (1820), 4 B. A Aid. 

75 . . 1225, 1233 

(1835), 4 A. A £. 156 1223 

Uaat>ton, R. r. (1833), 5 C. k P. 

559.. 694 

(1852), IE. k B. 

501 . . 1224, 1228 
Hariland, Ex parte (1880), 44 J. P. 

789.. 148 
Hawdon,R.».(1839),llA.AE.143 137 
Ham, R. r. (1847), 1 Den. 270 . . 1172 
Hawkes, K. r. (1838), 2 Mood. 60 729 
Havkeswood, R. r. (1783), 1 Leach, 

257 . • 730 
Oawkiiis, R. r. (1704), 2 East, P. C. 

485. .629, 632 

(1828), 3 C. & P. 392 14 

(1850), 1 Den. 584 . . 466, 

568 

(1896), Q. B. D. .. 415 

Haworth, R. r. (1830), 4 0. 4 P. 254 718 

Greenw. Coll. Stat. 

137 827 

Havtin, R. r. (1836), 7 C. k P. 281 557 

Hay, R. r. (1859), 2 F. A F. 4 . . 402 

— r. Tower Division Justices 

(1890), 24 Q. B. D.561.. 179, 

245 

— R. r. (1899), 16 Cape of Good 

Hope Rep. 290 . . 28n 
Haydn, R. r. (1825), 2 Fox 4 Sin. 

(/r.)379.. 401 
Hsydon, R. r. (1836), 7 C. t P. 445 466 
Hayes, R. r. (1727), 2 Ld. Raym. 

1518.. 88 

(1730), 2 8tr. 844 .. 220 

(1838), 2 M. 4 Rob. 

155 . . 87, 212 
BaTBUB. R. r. (1829), If. k M. 401 

* 1227 1231 

Hayiies (and Riee), R. r. (1846), 3 
Jones k La Touehe (/r.), 

568.. 290 
— R. r. (1614), 12 Co. Rep. 

118.. 67, 61,437 

(1815), 4 M. & Sel. 

214.. 2, 67, 1163 



(1825), Ry_. k M. 298 1059 

416 



(1825), Ry. 
(1859), IF. 



k F. 666 28, 



(1900), 64 J. P. 441 . . 215 

Haywaid, R. r. (1833), 6 C. c P. 

157 . . 821, 796 

(1844), 1C.4L 

618. .462, 668 

(1846), 2C.sK. 

234 • • 401 
Hayvocd, B. r. (1801), B. 4 R. 16 698 
Htad, B. r. (1785), 1 Leach, 368. .220, 293 



TAG* 

Hazltton, R. r. (1874), L. K. 2 C. 

C.R. 134.. 594, 605 
Hazy, R. r. (1826), 2 C. k P. 458. . 304 
Ilszzlewood, R. r. (1883), 48 J. P. 

151.. 612 
Head, R. r. (1858), 1 F. k F. 850 . . 438 
Headge, R. r. (1809), R. k R. 160 . . 669 
Headley's (Lord) Csse (1806), R. k 

R. 117.. 101 
Healer, R. r. (1824), 1 Mood. 1 . . 60 
Heane", R. r. (1864), 4 B. k S. 947. . 9, 

122,1044 
Heanor, R. r. (1844), 6 Q. B. 745 . . 1234 
Heaphy, Re (1888), 22 L. R. Ir. 

500.. 1282 
Hearn, R. r. (1841), C. k Mar. 109 831, 

422 
Heath, R. v. (1810), R. k R. 184 8, 980 

(1838), 2 Mood. 33 . . 461, 

601,602 
Heath r. Weaverham Overseers 

(1894), 2 Q. B. 108.. 1231 
Heatoo, R. r. (1863), 3 F. k F. 819 1179 

(1896), 60 J. P. 608 804, 

853 
Heaven r. Crntehlev (1903), 68 J. P. 

Rep. 53 . . 671, 698, 701 
Hebditch t. Mcllvaine (1894), 2 

Q. B. 54.. 1132 
Heber, R. r. (1732), 2 Str. 916 . . 149 
Hedges, R. r. (1803), 28 St. Tr. 1315 1014 

(1828), 8 C. k P. 410 970 

Hedley r. Pinkney S. S. Co. (1894) 

App. Cas. 222 . . 1253 
Heesom, R. v. (1878), 14 Cox, 40 . . 123, 

809 
Hegarty t. Shine (1878), 14 Cox, 

142 (/r.).. 834 
Hehir,R. v.(1895), 18 Cox, 267 (/r.) 449 
Helby v. Matthews (1895), App. Cas. 

571.. 269 
Helsham, R. v. (1880), 4 C. k P. 894 777 
Heming, R. 9. (1799), 2 East, P. C. 

1116.. 532 

(1833), 5 B. k Ad. 

666 . . 149 
Hemmings v. Gasson (1858), E. B. 

k E. 346 . . 1131 

R. r. (1864), 4 F. k F. 

50 . . 440, 627 
Hemp, R. r. (1833), 5 C. k P. 468 . . 313 
Hempstead, R. v. (1818), R.O. 

344 . . 87, 141, 217 
Hems, R. r. (1836), 7 0. k P. 812 . * 809 
Hench, R. v. (1810), R. k R. 163 . . 465 
Henderson v. Preston (1888), 21 

Q. B. D. 862.. 892, 898 

- R. v. (1841), C. k Mar. 

828 . . 171, 596 

(1870), 11 Cox, 693 458 

Hendy, R. v. (1850), 4 Cox, 243 . . 533 
Hendon, R. v. (1832), 4 B. k Ad. 

628.. 1235 
Henkers, R. r. (1886), 16 Cox, 257 908 
Hennah, R. r. (1877), 13 Cox, 547 . . 828, 

829,849 



Izzxii 



Table of Cases. 



PAGE 

Hennell r. Lyon (1817), 1 B.<fc Aid. 

182 • . 363 
Henry r. Adcy (1803), 3 East, 221 379 

— R. r. (1840), 2 Blood. 118 . . 525 
Hennessy r. Wright (1888), 57 L. J. 

(Q. B.) 594 . . 402 
Hensey, R. r. (1758), 19 St. Tr. 

1341 . . 939, 940, 946 
Henstww, R. r. (1864), L. k C. 444 600 
H easier, R. r. (1870), 1 1 Cox, 570 . . 3, 

436, 597, 613, 616, 1296 
Hcnslow f. Fawcctt ( 1835), 8 A. k E. 

51.. 1261 
Henson, R. r. (1852), Dean. 24 . . 1183 
Heowood, R. r. (1870), 11 Cox, 526 90, 
* 436 

Hopper, R. r. (1825), 1 C. k P. 608 122 
Herbert, R. r. (1792), 2 Ld. Ken. 

466 . . 148, 1279 
Hertfordshire C. C. r. New River 

Co. (1904), 2 Ch. 613 . . 1238 
Herrmann, R. p. (1879), 4 Q. B. D. 

284 .. 964, 975 

- r. Jeuchner (1885), 15 

Q. B. D. 361.. Ill 
Hcseltine, R. r. (1873), 12 Cox, 404 648, 

658 
Heskcth R. r. (1592), K. B. Rolls 938 
Hetherington, K. t>. (1840), 4 St. Tr. 

(N. S.) 663 . . 1021, 1022, 1023 
Hevey, R. p. (1782), 1 Leach, 229 . . 714, 

1280 
Hewett, R. p. (1842), C. k Mar. 

534 . 332 
Hewgill, R. r. (1854), Dears. 815 '. '. 610 
Hewios, R. v. (1841), 9 C. 4 P. 

786. .52, 301 
Hewitt, R. r. (1809), R. k R. 158. . 162 

(1866), 4 F. k F. 1101 825 

Hewlett, R. r. (1858), 1 F. A F. 91 841 
Hev, R. r. (1849), 1 Den. 602 . .277, 462, 

466 
Heydon, R. r. (1762), 3 Burr. 1270 150 

(1762), 1 W. Bl. 851 357 

Heymann r. R. (1878), L. R. 8Q. B. 

102. .79, 84, 85, 165, 280, 596, 
1142, 1280, 1283 
Heytesburv, R. r. (1863), 8 L. T. 

315. . 1234 
Heywood, R. r. (1847), 2 C. k K. 

352.. 765 

(1864), L. k C. 451 88 

Hibbert, R. r. (1875), 13 Cox, 82 . . 1162 

- — (1869), L. R. 1 C. C. 

R. 184. . 901 
Hicklin, R. r. (1868), L. R. 3 Q. B. 

860. .991, 1022, 1190 

Hickman, R. r. (1788), 1 Leach, 278 525 

(1824), 1 Mood. 84 586 

(1831), 6 CAP. 151 785 

Hicks, R. p. (1840), 2 M. k Rob. 802 57 

(1904), Cent. Cr. Ct. . . 416n 

Higgins p. Butcher (1606), Yelv. 89 290 

— R. r. (1683), 1 Vent. 866. . 290 
(1801), 2 East, 5 ..2,69, 

1071, 1293 J 



PAGE 

Higgins, R. r. (1829), 3 C. k P. 603 338 
(1830), 4 C. k P. 247 1084 

— (i836),6L.J.(M.c.) 

• 9. . 137 
Higginson, R. r. (1761), 2 Burr. 

1232. .84, 1197 

(1843), 1C k K. 

129. . 25 
Higgs r. Dixon (1817), 2 Stark! 



(X. P.) 180. . 
— R. p. (1846), 2 C. 4 K. 322 



(1867), 10 Cox, 527 



382 
627 
1248 
Higham r. Ridgway (1808), 10 East, 

109. . 321 
Higley, R. r. (1830), 4 C. k P. 366 825 
Hilaire, R. p. (1903), 3 N. S. W. St. 

Rep. 228. .37, 1167m 
Hill p. Yates (1810), 10 East, 229 . . 224 

( 1818), 2 Moore (C P.), 

80. . 894 
— R. r. (1777), 20 St. Tr. 1318 661, 1008 

(1781), 1 East, P. a 439 911 

(1811), R- k R. 190 . .804, 610 

(1838), 8 C. 4 P. 274. .303, 343, 

716, 718 

(1843), 1 C. k K. 168 . . 1142 

(1843), 2 M. k Rob. 458 641 

(1847), 2 Cox, 246 .. 739 

(1849), 1 Den. 453 . . 550 

(1851), 2 Den. 254 . .388, 874 

(1886), 50 J. P. 137 . . 874 

Hillam, R. r. (1872), 12 Cox, 174. . 828 
Hillman, R. r. (1863). L. k C. 343 830 
Hills, R. p. (1853), 2 E. k B. 176. . 137 
Hilton, R. r. (1837), 2 Lewin, 214 802 

(1858), Bell, 20. .277, 1320» 

Hind, R. v. (1813), R. k R. 253 . . 1171 

(1860), Bell, 253 . . 82a 

Hinde, R. p. (1902), 22 N. Z. L. R. 

436. .42, 859 
Hindmarsh, R. r. (1792), 2 Leach, 

569. . 781 
Hines, R. v. (1870), 80 Ont. Cr. Ct. 

Sess. Pap. 309. . 804 » 
Hinks, R. p. (1845), 1 Den. 84 . . 394m 
Hinley, R. r. (1843), 2 M. k Rob. 

524. .49, 88, 89, 90, 436 
Hirsch, R. r. (1899), 31 L. J. N. 

132 . . 1193 
Htrschfeld, R. r. (1897), 61 J. P. 

520.. 329 
Hirst, R. r. (1896), 18 Cox, 874 . . 336 
Histed, R. v. (1898), 19 Cox. 16 . . 336 
Hoare, R. p. (1817), 6M.ASel.266 1111 

(1859), 1 F. k F. 647 457, 

574 
Hoatson, R. r. (1847), 2 C. k K. 777 718 
Hobos, R. p. (1898), 2 Q. B. 647 . . 1204, 

1205, 1207 
Hobinstock, R. p. (1902), C. C. C. 553 
Hobson, R. r. (1803), R. k R. 56. .49, 559 
Hodge, R. r. (1838), 2 Lewin, 227. . 781 
Hodges, R. r. (1828), M. k M. 841 478, 

484, 490, 696, 700 

(1838), 8 C. k P. 125 24, 

101. 183 



Table of Cases. 



Ixzziii 



Hodgki 



..•. . PACK 

t. Willi*. (1813), 3 

Cimp. 401. . 363 

— R. r. (1900), 64 J. P. 

808. . 393 

(1900) (trare- 

„ . . . ^ ported). . 1014 

Hedgkias, R. r. (1836), 7 C. «fe P. 

298. .313, 420 

— (1869), L. R. I C. 

C. R. 212. .72, 217, 305, 1044, 1071 
Hodgson, He, Ex parte Brett (1875), 

1 Ch. E>. 151. . 1146 

— f. Fnllarton (1813), 4 

Taunt. 787. . 357 

— R. r. (1730), 1 Leach, 6 11, 798 

(1812), R. * R. 211 312, 

910 

(1328), 3 C. A P. 422 71, 

560,571 

(1356), Bears. <fc B. 3 704, 

705, 718 
Hodnettr. Forznan (1815), 1 Stark. 
w (N. P.) 90. . 381 

Hoe r. Kelthorpe (1696), 3 Salic. 154 865 
Hogaii, R. r . (1851), 2 Deo. 277 . .2, 784 
Hogg, R. P . (1841), 2 M. 4b Rob. 380 57, 

233 
H*3rjn* R- r. (1809), R. & R. 142 565, 

569 
Halberrr, B. r. (1840), 4 St- Tr. 

(X. S.) 1347. . 1278 
HaRwook, R- r. (1877-8), 3 Q. B. D. 

60 ; 4 Q. B. D. 42. .988, 995, 1133 
HokSiater, R. r. (1866), 10 Cox, 226 209 
HtUea, R. r. (1809), R. & R. 154. . 712, 

718, 724 

(1833), 5 B. * Ad. 347 128, 

131, 132, 188 

(1838), 8 C. & P. 606 45, 

414, 781 

(1372), 12 Cox, 166. . 1049 

_ (1892) (unreported). . 1014 

HeUfeat r. Dowaen (1737), 1 W. 

Bl. 8. . 382 
IWe r. Barlow (1858), 27 L. J. (C. 

P.) 208. .1184, 1185 
Thliday r. Hicks (1599), Cro. Eliz. 

638,661.. 268 
HolUoi R. r. (1782), 1 T. R. 692. . 147 

(1791), 4 T. R. 557. . 144, 

168 

(1792), 4 T. R. 691. . 182 

(1811), 2 M. <fc Rob. 

„ 851.. 782 

HaHnagfaerrr, R. r. (1825), 4B. k C. 

329. .216, 293, 1281 
Holla, R. r. (1776), 20 St- Tr. 1225 1254 

(1873), 12 Cox, 463 828, 829 

(1883;, 12 Q- B. D. 25 449, 

453 
HoUood, R. r. (17P1), 4 T. R- 607 67, 

70, 74, 1014 
Bolbwtr, R. r. (1883), 5 G. 4 P. 

524.. 442 

(1839), 9 C. * P. 

x 43.. 103 



AJCJP. 



Holloway. R. r . (1818), 1 Den. 370 277, 

441 

„„ „ (1901),65J.P.712 872 

Holloway r. R. (1851), 17 Q. B. 317 231, 

tr i « ,.,. 282,289,1035 

Holman, R. r. (1862), L. * C. 177 ; 

« , 9 Cox, 201. . 88 

Holmes, R. r. (1852), Dears. 207 . . *; 

11«3, 1188. UMsi 

(1871), L. R. l C. C. 

R. 334. .312, 910. 920 

0«83),12Q.B.I>.23 C09 

(1899), Jelf, Crim. 

Kv. 65. . 539 

n , „ Ro . we ( fr - K - *•). 289 1 |K 

Holmes r. Pontin (1792), Peake 

d i ^ « ( 8rd **•), 185. . 381 

Holroyd, R. r. (1841), 2 M. k Rob. 

„ ti „ ,. 339. .689, 854 

Holt, R. r. (1793), 5 T. R. 436 . .72, 305, 

/tOMV 847,350,995,1180 

(1836), 7 (\ * p. 5i 8 s-i0, 

i 842 

(I860), Bell, 280 3C«, 311, 

Holtcroft's Owe, 2 Hale, 246 . . 171 
Holyoake, R. r. (1842), 4 Sfc. Tr. 

„ „ ,. , , (»- 8.) 1381. . 1022 

Home r. Beotinck (1820), 2 B. k B. 

„ „ « 180, 162. . 402 

5°°!h R " P « (,830 >' * Mood - »1 • • 806 
Hoodlcss, R. r. (1900), 64 J. P. 282 320 

Hook, R. r. (1858), Denrs. k B. C06 409, 

Hooper, R. r. (1819), 1 Chit. (K. B.) 

it -x « , * 9 l" 135 

Hoost, R. r. (1802), 2 East, P. C. 

it *. 950. . 717 

Hope r. EcereJ (1886), 17 Q. B. D. 

338 92'' 

— R. *. (1833), 1 Mood. 396 ." 

„ „ (1834), 1 Mood. 414 . 

Hopes, R. r. (1834), 7C4P, ISC M< 
Hopkins, R. r. (1H38), 8 C. k P. 591 781 

(1842), C. k Mar. 

254. . 901 

(1866), 10 Cox, 229 309, 

794 

u i r> J^ 96 ), 1 Q. B. 652 1151 

Hopley, R. r. (I860), 2 F. k P. 201 79G 
Horan, R. r. (1872), Ir. Rep. 6C. L. 
„ v , , 298. .266, 269 

Horn r. Noel (1807), 1 Camp. 61 . . 354. 

- R. r. (1883), 15 Cox, 205. .227, 275, 

1312 1819 
Hornby, R. p. (1844), 1 C. <fc K. 305 462 
Home, R. r. (1777), 20 St. Tr. 651 72, 

143, 989, 991 

H ~V u {l f?°)> 4 Cox > 268 • • 1^2 
Home Tooke, R. r. (1794), 25 St. 

tr. 1..806, 818, B60 

(1794), 1 East, 

,t « p - C. 98. . 940 

Homer, R. r. (1783), 1 Leach, 270 ; 

Cold. 295. ! 452 
9 



76.1 
740 
337 



Ixxxiv 



Table of Caws. 



PAGE 

Horner, R. r. (1790). 2 East, P. C 

70S.. 524 
Horner r. Horner (1799), 1 Hagg. 

Consist Rep. 387. .1175 
Hornsea, R. r. (1854), Dean. 291. . 278, 

1224 
Horsev, R. r. (1862), 8 F. A F. 287 798 
Horwell, R. r. (1883), 6 C. A 1*. 

148. .728, 729 
Horwood r. Smith (1788), 2 T. R. 

750.. 270 
Hoseason, R. r. (181 1 ), 14 East, 605 147 
Hotine, R. r. (1904), 68 J. P. Rep. 

148.. 580 
Hough, R. r. (1806). R. A R. 120 811, 

721 
Houghton r. Taplin (1897), 13 T. L. 

R. 886 1164 
Houlton, R. r. (1823), 1 Jebb (C. C 

Ir.), 24.. 897 
Hounsell, R. r. (1840), 2 M. A Rob. 

292. 824 

— r. Smith (I860), 2 C B. 

(N. IS.) 781.. 1186 
Houseman. R. r. (1837), 8 C. A P. 

180. • 712 
Housin r. Barrow (1794), 6 T. r! 

122. . 806 
How r. Hall (1811), 14 East, 174 '. '. 317 
— R. r. (1726), 2 Str. 699 . . 75 
Howard, R. r. (1882), 1 M. A Rob. 

187. .360. 1065 

— r. R. (1865), 10 Cox. 54. . 286 

— r. Smith (1841), 3 Scott 

(M. R.),574. . 316 

— R. r. (1902), 2 K. B. 363 147 
Howarth. R. r. (1821), 8 Stark. 

(N. P.) 29. .72, 596 

(1828), 1 Mood. 

207. .807. 811, 842 

(1870), 11 Cox, 

588. .600, 611 

Howe, R. r. (1836), 7 C. A P. 268 533 

— lie (1902), 2 K. B. 290 . . 1 138 

Howell, R. r. (1830), 2 Den. 862m 489 

(1839), 9 C. A P. 437 13, 

670, 671 

(1844), 1 Den. 1 . . 321 

(1845), 1 Cox, 190 . . 681 

(1864), 4 F. 4 F. 160 922, 

1279 1287 
Howe*, R. r. (1834), 6 a A P. 404 ' 834 

(1884), 7 A. A E. 60m 285 

Howie, R. r. (1869), 11 Cox, 820 . . 730, 

784, 737 
Howlev, R. r. (1862), L. A C. 159. . 739 
Hubbard, R. r. (1881). 14 Cox, 565 822 
Hube, R. r. (1792). 5 T. R. 542 . . 1026 
Hubert r. Groves (1794), 1 Esp. 147 1121 
Hubson, R. r. (1690), 1 East, P. C. 

258. 798 
Hucks, R. r. (1810), 1 Stark. (N. P.) 

521.. 821 
Hndson, R. r. (1858), 1 F. A F. 56 1065 

(1860), Bell, 263. .598, 618, 

1282 



■» i 



TAG* 

Huggin?, R. r. (1730), 2 Ld. Raym. 

1574 . . 220, 293. 782, 

783 
Hughes. R. r. (1785), 1 Leach. 406 633 

(1802). 2 East. P. C. 

1002. . 715 
(1813), 2 Lewin, 229 31 

(1826), 2 CAP. 420 694 

(1880), 4 CAP. 378 1101, 

1102 

(1882), 5 C A P. 126 779, 

819 

(1882). 1 Mood. 370 563 

(1841), 9 C A P. 752 911 

(1842),CAMar.6J»3 61 

(1843), 1 Cox, 44 . . 416 

(1843), 1 C A K. 235 202 

(1844), 1CAK. 519 101, 

1044, 1060, 1062 

(1850), 4 Cox, 449 . . 826 

(1857), Dears. A B. 

188.. 1046 

(1857), Dears. A B. 

248. .788, 799, 808 

(1858), 1 F. A F. 855 607 

(1860), 8 Cox, 278 . . 1800 

(I860), Bell, 242 . .18, 87, 

549 

(1878). 14 Cox, 223 341 

( 1879), 4 Q. B. D. 614 1048 

Hughes r. Marshall (1831). 5 C A 

P. 150. . 1264 

— r. Rogers (1841 ), 8 M. A W. 

128. . 383n 
Hugill, R. r. (1800), 2 Rnss. Cr*. 

(6th ed.) 403. . 518 
Hull (and Smith), R. r. (1880) (un- 
reported). . 210 
— R. r. (1664), Kel. (J.) 40 . . 799 

(1860), 2 F. A F. 16 . . 97 

Hull, Re (1882), 9 Q. B. D. 689 . . 154 
Hulse r. Hulse (1871), L. R. 2 P. A 

D. 259. . 1177 
Humphreys, R. r. (1842), C. A Mar. 

601.. 108 
Humphries, R. r. (1908). 67 J. P. 

Rep. 896. .898, 894 
Humphris (1904), 2 K. B. 89 ; 68 J. 

P. Rep. 825. . exxx 
Humpbrrs, Ex parte (1850), 19 

L. J. (M. C.) 189. . 876 
Hundsdon, R. r. (1781), 2 East, P. 

C.611.. 478 
Hungerford, R. r. (1790), 2 East, 

P. C 518, . 628 
Hunt, R. r. (1811), 81 St. Tr. 867. . 148, 

216, 804, 998 

(1820), 1 St. Tr. (N. S.) 

171.. 807, 317, 886, 998, 
1007, 1098, 1100, 1288 

(1820), 8 B. A Aid. 444 181, 

138 

(1825), 1 Mood. 93. .798, M>7, 

817, 842, 894 

(1838), 8 C A P. C42 . . 564 

(1845). 1 Cox, 177 . . 1099 



Table of Cases. 



Ixxxv 



TAGS 

Hsnt, R. r. (1847), 2 Cox, 261 . . 229 
Hntr. Goodlake (1*73), 43 L. J. 

(C. P.) 54. . 994 
Banter, R. r. (1794), East, P. C. 

928, 977. .75, 80, 532, 
712, 741 

(1823), R. A R. 511 711 

(1829),8C.AP.591 128, 

248, 412 

(1829), 4 CAP. 128 380, 

718 

(1867), 10 Cox, 642 596, 

604 
Huntley, R. *. (1860), Bell, 238. .72, 805, 

549 
Hon! r. Hazing (1824), 1 C. A P. 

372.. 402 
Huter, R. v. (1843), 2 M. A Rob. 

473. . 715 
Harrell, R. r. (1825), Rv. 4 M. 296 60 

(1862), 3 "F. A F. 271 1067 

Hone, R. r. (1841), 2 M. A Rob. 

360. .13, 975 
Hatchings, R. r. (1878), 6Q. B. D. 

800. . 171 
Hatduns, R. r. (1831), 2 Deac. Cr. 

L. 1517. . 676 
HateainsoB, R. r. (1678), 3 Keb. 

785.. 171 

(1784), 1 Leach, 

339.. 1018 

(1820), R. A R. 

412. .59, 638 

(1822), 2 B. A 

C. 608a. . 323 

(1864), 9 Cox, 

555.. 800 
Haxlev, R. r. (1842), C. A Mar. 596 530 
Hyamp, R. r. (1836), 7 C. A P. 441 632 
Hyde r. Hvde (1876), L.R. 1P.4 

D. 130. . 1173 
Hvland, R- r. (1898), 24 Vict. L. R. 

101. . 830n 



PAKSOX r. Stuart (1787), 1 T. R. 

748. .69, 71, 1127, 1197 
Bdertoo r. Ilderton (1793), 2 H. Bl. 

145. . 1175 
lUidge, R. r. (1849), 1 Den. 404 . . 738 
Ilott »- Wilkes (1820), 3 B. A Aid. 

304. . 804 
R. r. (1810), 13 East, 164* 118% 

1216 
r, R. p. (1848). 1 Den. 325 . .712, 719 
hgfcain, R. r. (1849), 14 Q. B. 396 1057 

(1859), Bell, 181 . . 693 

(1864), 5 B. A S. 257 153, 

155, 158 
l*gnm, R. r. (1096), 2 SaJk. 593 . . 1102 

(1712), lSalk-BS*.- 31 

feprr, JL r. (1900), 64 J. P- 164 . . 320 

iaftataaote of, K. r. .*« **»* o/ 
faritk, county, or place. 

h*n, R. r. (1993), 1 Q- »• 46 °V98 803 



rACK 
International, The (1871), L. R. 3 

A. AE. 821.. 955, 958 
Ion, R. r. (1852), 2 Den. 475 . .719, 975 
Iowa r. Height (1902), 94 Amer. St. 

Rep. 323.. 834 
Ipstones, R. f. (1868), L. R. 3 Q. B. 

216. . 1234 
Irving r. Callow Park Dairy Co. 

(1902), 66 J. P. 804. . 1166 
Isaac, R. r. (1799), 2 East, P. C. 

1031.. 652 
Isaacs, R. r. (1862), L. A C. 220 .. 828, 

829 
Ishertrood, R. r. (1758), 2 Ld. Ken. 

202. . 145 
Isle of Ely, R. v. (1850), 19 L. J. 

(M. C.) 223. . 1237 
Israel, R. v. (1847), 2 Cox, 263 . . 183 
Ivens, R. v. (1835), 7 C. A P. 213. . 1181 



JACK, R. r. (1894), 6 Queensland 

L. J. 60. . 97 
Jackson r. Thomason (1861), 31 L. 

J. (Q. B.) 11. . 417 
— R. r. (1783), I Leach, 269 531, 

C42 

(1787), 1 T. R. 653 . . 147 

(1794), 25 St Tr. 783, 

885. .101, 946 

(1802), 1 Leach, 193» 525 

(1818), 3 Camp. 370 604 

(1826), 1 Mood. 119 448 

(1838), 2 Mood. 32 . . 461 

(1842), 2 Russ. Cr. 

(6th ed.) 45. . 631 

(1844), 1 C. A K. 884 672 

(1855), 6 Cox, 625 . . 894m 

(1857), 7 Cox, 357 . . 779 

(1864), 9 Cox, 505 . . 458 

(1890), 17 Cox, 104. . 820, 

843 
Jacobs, R. r. (1817), R. A R. 331 . . 923, 

924 926 

(1826), 1 Mood. 140 . . U76 

Jacobs r. Layborn (1843), 11 M. A 

W. 686 . . 387 
Jacobson, R. v. (1880), 14 Cox, 622 1208, 

1210 
Jagger, R. r. (1797), 1 East, P. C. 

456.. 398 
James, R. r. (1693), 1 Show. 397 315, 

860 

(1831), 5 C. A P. 153 11015, 

1107 

(1836), 7 C. & P. 653 . . 47, 

711,718 
■ (1887), 8 CAP. 131.. 677 

(1838), 8 C. A P. 292.. 738 

(1844), 1 C. A K. 630 . . 834, 

843 

(1849), 4 Cox, 90 13, 715 

(1850), 2 Den. 1 ..1170 

(1852), 6 Cox, 5 . . 407 



hxxvi 



Table of Cases. 



PAGE 

James, R. r. (1863), 32 L. J. (M. C.) 

211.. 1210 

(1871), 12 Cox, 127 .. 121, 

122, 297, 596, 608 

■ (1890), 24 Q. B. D. 439 19, 

613, 1303 

(1902), 1 K. B. 540 . . 60, 

80, 803, 433, 460, 550 

Jameson, R. r. (1896), 2Q. B. 425 . . 21, 

38, 74, 139, 162, 777, 988, 956, 

957, 959 
Jarman, R. r. (1878), 14 Cox, 111.. 696 
Janald, R. r. (1863), L. 4 C. 301 . . 68, 

299,636 
J my 19, R.r. (1755), 1 East, 643n .. 80 

(1824), 1 Mood. 7 . . 629 

- — (1887), 2 M. 4 Rob. 

40.. 20, 391, 1307 

(1855), Dear*. 552 341, 980 

(1867), L.R. ICC. R. 

96.. 333 

(1902), 20 Cox, 249 . . 900 

Jayne r. Price (1814), 5 Taunt. 326 1111 

Jeans, R. r. (1844), 1 C. 4 K. 539 . . 698 

— r. Wheedon (1843), 2 M. 4 

Rob. 480 . . 423 
Jefferies, Ex parte (1829), 6 Bing. 

195.. 1251* 

— R. r. (1897), Cent. Crim. 

Court.. 1075 
Jeffreys, Ex parte (1888), 52 J. P. 

230.. Ill 
Jellv, R. r. (1867), 10 Cox, 653!! 290 
Jelly man, R. r. (1838), 8 C. 4 P. 

604.. 391, 898, 924 
Jemmy Governor, R. r. (1900), 21 

N. S. W. Rep. 278 . . 109n, 177n 
Jemot, R. r. (1812), 1 Rubs. Cr. (6th 

ed.) lOn. . . 540 
Jenkins r. Tucker (1788), 1 H. Bl. 

90.. 1207 

— R. r. (1813), R. 4 R. 244 . . 628 

(1822), R. 4 R. 492. . 336 

(1845), 1 Cox, 177 . . 391 

(1869), L. R. 1 C. C. 

R. 187 .. 322 
Jenks r. Turpin (1884), 13 Q. B. D. 

505 . . 1198, 1200, 1202 

— R. r. (1796), 2 East, P. C. 514 300 
Jenning, R. v. (1838), 2 Lewin, 130 815 
Jennings, R. v. (1829), 4 C. 4 P. 249 911 

(1858\ D.4B.447; 

7 Cox, 897 . . 465 
Jennison, R. r. (1862), L. 4 C. 157 600 
Jenour, R. r. (1740), 7 Mod. 400 . . 82, 

146 
Jenoure r. Delmege (1891), App. 

Cas 73 1182 
Jenson, R. r. (1835), 1 Mood. 434 .' .' 562 
Jephson v. Barker (1890), 3 T. L. R. 

40.. 280 
Jepson, R. v. (1798), 2 East, P. C. 

1115.. 532, 1117 
Jervis, R. r. (1833), 6 C. 4 P. 156 . . 549 
Jessop, R. v. (1858), Dears. 4 B. 

442.. 613 



PACK 

Jessop, R. r. (1877), 16 Cox, 204 . . 41, 

324, 786, 1288 
Jewell, R. r. (1857), 7 E. 4 B. 140 131, 

137 
Jewett, R. r. (1847), 2 Cox, 227 . . 469 
Jeycs, R. r. (1835), 3 A. 4 E. 416 . . fi, 

248 257 
Jobling, R. r. (1823), R. 4 R. 525 . . ' 629 
John, R. r. (1790), 1 East, P. C. 367, 

858.. 321, 398 
(1835), 7 C. 4 P. 324 .. 337 

(1837),7L.J.(M.C.)92 247 

(1875), 13 Cox, 100 . . 32, 502, 

533,538 
Johnson r. Ogilbv, 3 P. Wms. 279 1089m 

- R. r. (1620), 2 Rolle Rep. 

225 . . 84 

(1679), 2 Show. 1 . . 1071 

(1726), 1 Str.644 . . 144 

(1752), 1 Wils. 325 . . 121 

(1786), 2 East, P. C. 

488 . • 6351 

(1793), R. 4 R. 10». \ 305 

(1805), 6 East, 583 . . 21, 

162, 163 

(1805), 7 East, 65 . . 44, 

511, 992 

(1815),3M.4Sel.539 

5, 74, 91 

(1816),4M.4Sel.51o 

5, 257 

(1827), 1 Mood. 173 . . 136, 

258 

(1841), C. 4 Mar. 218 1*2, 

18,632 

(1846), 2 C. 4 K. 894 372 

(1847), 2 C. 4 K. 354 820, 

(1851), 2 Den. 310 .. 453 

(1857), Dears. 4 B. 

340 . . 58 

(I860), 2 E. 4 E. 613 29* 

(1864), L. 4 C. 489 464, 

642 
(1865), L. 4 C. 632. . 919 

(1872), L. R. 2 C. C. 

R. 15 . . 10G8 

(1884), 15 Cox, 481 905 

Johnston, R. r. (1842), 2 Mood. 254 600, 

608 

(1851), 5 Cox, 183 

(/r.).. 740 

(1864), 15 Ir. Com. 

Law R. 60 . . 835 
Jolliffe, R. r. (1791), 4 T. R. 285 . . 123, 

145, 146, 147, 1095 
Jolliffe r. Wallasey L. B. (1874), L. 

R. 9 C. P. 62 1220 
Jones, Ex parte, He Grissell (1879), 

12 Ch. D. 484 . . 1145 

— r. Aahbnmham (1804), 4 

East, 455, 460 . . 1065 

— r. Clay (1798), 1 B. 4 P. 

191 . . 140 

— r. Davies (1902), 20 Cox, 184 35, 

478 



Table of Cases. 



Ixxxvii 



TAGS 



1089 
382 



Jones c. German (1896), 2 Q. B. 

418.. 
~ v. Jones (1841), 9 M. A W. 

75. . 

- r. Merionethshire Permanent 

Benefit Building Society 

(1892), 1 Ch. 173 . . 1090n 

- r. Mason (1729), 2 Str. 833.. 381 

- r. Pope (1666), 1 Saand. 34 895 

- r. Randall (1774), 1 Cowp. 17 

847 358 

- r. Scullard (1898), 2Q.B.' 

565.. 466 

- r. Stevens (1822), 11 Price, 

235.. 1131 

- R. r. (1G04), Kel. (J.) 37 .. 88 
— - (1689), 2 East, P. C. 499 626 

(1726), 2 Str. 704 .. 150 

(1741), 2 Str. 1146 . . 4, 1251 

(1742),lWils.(K.B.)7 147 

(1764), 1 Leach, 53 . . 

(1773), 1 Leach, 102 . . 



(1776), 1 Leach, 139 



738 
24, 
183 
525 



(1779), 1 Doug. 300 .. 75, 302 



(1779), 1 Leach, 204 
(1785), 2 East, P.O. 991 
(1790), 1 Leach, 537 . . 
(1791), Peake, 51 (3rd 

ed.).. 
(1806), 8 East, 31 . . 
(1809), R. A R. 152 . . 



717 
702 
630 

1060 
125 

331, 
336 

1014 
91, 



(1809), 31 St.Tr.251.. 
(1809), 2 Camp. 131 . . 

344, 391 
(1812), 3 Camp. 230 . . 1216 
(1827), 2 CAP. 629.. 338 
(1830), 4 CAP. 217.. 643 
(1831), 2 B. A Ad. 611 72, 

304 
(1832), 4 B. A Ad. 345 1142, 

1143 
(1835), 7 C A P. 167 . . 262 
(1836), 2 Har. A Wol. 

293 . . 131 
(1837), 7 CAP. 833.. 672 
(1838), 8 C A P. 288 . . 573 
(1839), 8C.fi P. 776 . .89, 91 
(1840), 9 C A P. 258 . . 819 
(1840), 9 C A P. 401 . . 187, 

257, 1088 
(1841),9Dowl.Pr.Cas. 

504 .. 134, 135 
(1842), C A Mar. 61 1 . . 461 
(1842), C A Mar. 614 . . 1179 
(1843), 2 Mood. 94 .. 91 
(1843), 1CAK. 181.. 677 
(1843), 1C AK.243.. 779 
(1845), 1 Den. 101 . . 42 
(1846), 1 Den. 166 . . 401 
(1847), 1 Den. 188 443, 518 
(1847), 1 Den. 218 . . 1116 
(1847), 2C.sK. 524 . . 1042 
(1848), 6 St. Tr. (N. S.) 

783.. 990, 998, 1099 



FAGK 

Jones, R. r. (1851), 1 Den. 551 . . 599, 609 

(1858), Dears. A B. 555 491 

(1861), 4 L. T. 154 . . 908 

(1869), 11 Cox, 858 . . 1177 

(1870), 11 Cox, 393 . . 546 

(1870), 11 Cox, 544 .. 800, 802 

(1872), 12 Cox, 241 .. 335 

(1874), 12 Cox, 628 .. 805 

(1877), 14 Cox, 8 . . 552 

(1881), 14 Cox, 528 .. 268 



(1888), 11 Q. B. D. 118 1179 

(1884), 15 Cox, 475 .. 612 

(1896), 1 Q. B. 4 . . 927 

(1898), 1 Q. B. 119 . . 606, 

613, 922, 1149, 1279 

(1899), 63 J. P. 139 . . 254 

(1901), 36 L. J. Newsp. 

650.. 820 
Jones (E.), R. v. (1901), 19 Cox, 678 2, 

784 804 890 
Jordan, R. r. (1836), 7 C. A P. 432 625, 

635 

(1839), 9 C A P. 118 22, 

212 908 
Jordeson v. Hull Gas Co. (1899), 2 Ch.' 

217 1185 
Jordin r. Crump (1841), 8 M. A w! 

782.. 
Josephs v. Adkins (1817), 2 Stark. 

(N. P.) 76 . . 
— R. v. (1839), 8 Dowl. Pr. 

Cas. 178 . . 
Joule, R. v. (1836), 5 A. A E. 539 . . 
Joyce, R. v. (1814), 3 C. A P. 411n 
(1865), L. A C 576 



853 

265 

130 
130 
970 
737 
Juby, R. r. (1886), 16 Cox, 160 1148, 

1149 
Judd, R. r. (1788), 2 T. R. 255 . . 652 
Judge 9. Bennett (1887), 52 J. P. 247 1161 
Jukes, R. p. (1800), 8 T. R. 542 . . 78 
Juryman (case of a) (1810), 12 East, 

231m . . 200, 224 
Justices of. See name of county or 

borough. 
Justin, R. r. (1897), 61 J. P. 605 . . 1137 



KADWALADEU r. Bryan (1029), 

Cro. Car. 162 . . 73» 
Kain, R. e. (1837), 8 C A P. 187 . . 538 

(1883), 15 Cox, 388 . . 212 

Kane, R. r. (1901), 1 K. B. 472. .576, 582 
Katz, R. v. (1900), 64 J. P. 807 . . 874 
Kauffman, R. r. (1904), 68 J. P. Rep. 

189.. 903 
Kaufman v. Gerson (1904), 1 K. B. 

591 . . 1089n, 1090a 
Kay r. Brookman (1829), M. A M. 

286.. 382 
— R. v. (1857), Dears. A B. 231 . . 455 

(1870), L, R. 1 C C. R. 

257.. 733 

(1887), 16 Cox, 292 1173, 1175 

Kealey, R. r. (1857), 2 Den. 68 . . 608 



lxxxviii 



Table of Cases. 



1'AGK 

Kearv, R. r. (1878), 14 Cox, 143 . . 1«4 
Keate, R. r. (1697), Comb. 406 . . 798 
Keen p. R. (1847), 10 Q. B. 928 . . 126, 228 
Kecna, R. p. (1868), L. R. 1 C. C. R. 

113.. 560, 568 
Keir p. Leenian (1844-6), 6 Q. B. 

308 ; 9 Q. B. 371 . . 832, 1090«, 

1091 
Keighley, R. r. (1856), Dears. A B. 

145 ; 7 Cox, 217 . . 604 
Keite, R. r. (1697), 1 Ld. Raym. 138 220 
Keith, R. p. (1855), Dears. 486 . . 75, 765 
Kellehcr, R. 9. (1877), 2 L. R. Ir. 11 596 
Kelly, R. r. (1820), R. A R. 421 . . 13 
(1825), 1 Mood. 113 . . 779 

(1847), 2 C. A K. 379.. 13 

(1848), 8 Cox, 75 .. 405 

. (1848). 2 C. A K. 814.. 793 

(1900), 64 J. P. 84 . . 550 

KelBey, R. r. (1832), 1 Dowl. 481 . . 258 
Kemp r. Christmas (1898), 79 L. T. 

233.. 1114 
Kempson, R. p. (1893), 28 L. J. N. 

477.. 798, 1163,1186 
Kendrick, R. r. (1835), 7 C. A P. 

184.. 1247 
Kennedy p. Cowic (1891), 1 Q. B. 

771.. 1163 

- p. Lyell (1883), 9 App. 

Cas. 81 . . 401 
Kcnnett, R. p. (1781), 5 C. A P. 282n 1101 
Kcnniff, R. r. (1903), Queensland St. 

Rep. 17 . . 781m 
Kennv, R. p. (1877), 2 Q. B. D. 

807 . .460, 550 
Kenrick, R. p. (1843), 5 Q. B. 49 . . 70, 

601, 1279, 1284, 1286 
Kensington r. Iuglis (1809), 8 East, 

273.. 380, 418 
Kent, R. r. (1810), 13 East, 220 . . 1235 

(1814),2M.AScl.413.. 1235 

Kent (Justices), R. p. (1809), 11 East, 

229 . • 154 
Kent County Council, lie (1891*)! 

1 Q. B. 389 . . 257 
Kent Count v Council p. Sandgate 
Urban District Council (1897), 

61 J. P. 517 . . 1224 
Kcnward p. Knowles (1744), Willes, 

463.. 1251n 
Kenworthy, R. p. (1823), 1 B. A C. 

711 230 
Kenyon, R. p. (1901), 36 L. J. N. 571 4, 

1208 1209 
Kerr. R. r. (1837), 8 C. A P. 176 . .' 445 
Kerrigan, R. p. (1864), L. A C. 883 608 
Kerrison, R. r. (1813), 1 M. A Scl. 

435 . . 1235 

(1815), 3 M. & Sel. 

526 . . 1235 
Kershaw, R. p. (1902), 18 T. L. R. 

857 . . 22, 335 
Kessal, R. p. (1824), 1 C. A P. 437 . . 789 
Kettle, R. p. (1819), 3 Chit. Cr. L. 

947, a . . 435 
Kew, R. p. (1872), 12 Cox, 455 . . 801 



TACK 

Kev, R. r. (1857), 2 Den. 347 . . 185, 198, 

206, 1320* 
Keyn, R. r. (1876), 2 Ex. D. 63 . .39, 41 
Kidd, R. r. (1701), 14 St. Tr. 147 . . 539 
Kiddle, R. r. (1898), 19 Cox, 77 . . 320 
Kilham, R. r. (1870), L. R. 1 C. C. R. 

261 . . 609, 611 
Killminsler, R. p. (1835), 7 C. A P. 

228.. 97 
Kimber p. Press Association (1893), 

1 Q. B. 65 . . 996, 1133 
Kinder, R. p. (1800), 2 East, P. C. 

855 . . 713 
King (qui tarn) p. Cole (1796), 6 T. R. 

642 . • 150 

King r. Tebbart (1693), Skin. 387 838 

— R. p. (1747), 2 Str. 1268 . . 122 

— ,- (1817), R. A R. 332 . . 13 

(1820), 2 Chit. (K. B.) 

217 . . 138 
(1832), 5 CAP. 123 .. 716 

(1844), 13 L. J. (M. C.) 

43 . . 474, 476 

(1844),14L.J.(Q.B.)86 284 

(1845), 1 Cox, 232 . . 394* 

King, r. R. (1845), 7 Q. B. 782 . . 222, 231, 

281, 283, 1284 

(1849), 14 Q. B. 81 . . 1044 

(1897), 61J. P. 663 . . 282 

King, R. r. (1865), 4 F. A F. 493 . . 58 

(1871), 12 Cox, 73 . . 568, 573 

(1897), 1 Q. B. 214. .92, 171, 

174, 232, 596, 601, 604, 
606, 610, 1313 

(1900), 19 N. Z. L. B. 

409.. 



530 

320 
400 



Kingham, R. r. (1902), 66 J. P. 393 
Kinglake, R. r. (1870), 11 Cox, 499 

(1870), 18 W. R. 

806, cit. . . 227 
Kingston, R. p. (1806), 8 East, 41 . . 87, 

91, 1088 

(1830), 4 CAP. 387 831 

Kingston (Duchess), R. p. (1776), 

20 St. Tr. 355 . . 132, 364, 397, 1180 
Kinloch, R. p. (1746), Fost. 16 . . 224 
Kinnear, R. p. (1819), 2 B. A Aid. 

462 . . 213, 789 

(1838), 2 M. A Rob. 

117.. 729 
Kinncrsley p. Orpe (1779), 1 Doug. 

56.. 363 

- R. p. (1719), 1 Str. 193 1285 
(1760), 1 W. BL 

294 A n . . 146 
Kipps, R. p. (1850), 4 Cox, 167 .. 900 
Kirkham, R. p. (1837), 8 C. A P. 115 795 

— p. GUI (1897), 1 Q. B. 201 268 
Kirkwood (R.), R. p. (1831), 1 Mood. 

304 . . 18. 715 

— (J.), R. p. (1831), 1 Mood, 

311.. 708 
Kirachenboim p. Salmon and Gluck- 

stein (1898), 2 Q. B. 19 . . 1152 
Kirtland r Pounsett (1809), 1 Taunt 

570 . . 299 



TabU of Casts. 



Ixxxix 



Kinraa r. Goodwin (1*11), 9 Dowl. i 

330 lOOOw 1 
R'mrin r. Hints (1886), 54 L. T. 610 1*1 96 1 
Ktebeo, R. r. (1905), R. & R. 95 . . 819 I 
Kfeheaer, R. r. (1873), L. R. 2 

C. C. R. 88 . . 1236 
KJtaoo. R. r. (1853), Dears. 187 . . 317, 

655 
Klosowski. R. r. (1903). 167 Cent. 

Crim. Ct Seas. Pap. 471 . . 309 
Knewlaad. R. r. (1796), 4 L«ach, 

721 . . 456, 525 
KnqAt r. Duller (1664), Haxdr. 323. 363 
- R. r. (1781). 2 East. P. C. 

510 . . 634 

(1823), 1 C. k, P. 116 81, 

(1827), 7B.4C. 413 1222 

(1871), 12 Cox, 102 . . 446 

(1878), 14 Cox, 31 . . 1142 

(1905), 69 J. P. 108 cxxix 

Knights. R. r. (1860), 2 F. & F. 46 785, 

826 
KsnlL R- r. (1822), 5 B. & Aid. 929* 409, 

1061 
Knock. R. r. (1877), 14 Cox, 1 . . 791, 797, 

837 
Knewlden r. R. (1864), 5 B. & S. 532 9, 

280, 
Kaowles, R. r. (1810), 1 St. Tr.(N. S.) 

497.. 1007 

(1901), 65 J. P. 27.. 831 

Knox. Re (1889); 23 L. R. lr. 542 . . 1 175, 

1176 
Kafan, R. r. (1864). 4 F. & F. 68. . 41, 

1285 
Koops, R.r.(1837),6A. AE.198.. 1064 
Keps r. R. (1894), A pp. Caa. 650 . . 214, 

394 
Ktaawe. R. r. (1902), 66 J. P. 121 . . 814, 

1294 
Kwok a Sing. Att.-Geo. of Hong 

Kong r. (1873), L. R. 5 P. C. 179 21, 

539 



LABOUCHERE, K. r. (1880), 14 

Cox, 419.. 1134 

(1884),12Q.B.D. 

320.. 146, 149,150, 1128 



r. Higgins (1822), 1 D. t R. 

28.. 1173 

— r. Hooper (1795), 6 T. R. 

224 . . 1107 

ct, B. p. (1848), 3 Cox, 517 . . 415 
Leidler, R r. (1899), 19 Cox, 860 . . 418 
Like r. Butler (1854), 5 E. * B. 99 48 

- R. r. (1591). 8 Leon. 268 .. 78, 

1084 

(1869), II Cox, 388 .. 770 

Ukin, & r. (1900), 35 L. J. N. 191 1068 




291.. 795 
Ltmb'sCmft (1610), 9 Co. Rep- 59. . 998 



TAQl 

L*mbe, R. r. ( 1791), 2 Leacb, 552 . . 333 
Lambert, R. r. (1810), 31 St. Tr. 

335.. 813, 990, 995 

(1847), 2 Cox, 809 573 

Lamont r. Crook (1840), 6 M. A W. 

615.. 413 
Lancashire, R. r. (1831), 2 B. & Ad. 

813 . . 1289 

(Justices), R. r. (1822), 

ID. &R.485.. 147 
Lancaster (Justices), R. r. (1819), 1 

Chit. (K. B.) 602 .. 149 

- R. r. (1868), 32 J. P. 711 1236 

(1890), 16 Cox, 737 1081, 

1266 
Lands, R. r. (1855), Dears. 567 • • 867, 

1142 
Landulpb, R. *. (1834), 1 M. * Rob. 

893 1222 
Lane r. Hegberg (1699), Ball (X.P.*),* 

19, cit... 837 
Langbridge, R. r. (1849), 1 Den. 

448.. 873 
Langford, R. r. (1842), C. & Mar. 

602.. 671, 1102 
Langhurst, R. r. (1866), 10 Cox, 358 123 
Langley, R r. (1703), 6 Mod. 125 . . 1127 

(I860), 8 Cox, 366 . . 1234 

Langley v. Bombay Tea Co. (1900), 

2Q. B. 460.. 1152 
Langmead, R. r. (1864), L. & C. 427 553 
Langton, K. t>. (1877), 2 Q. B. D. 

296 . . 66, 419 
Lapier, R. r. (1784), 1 Leacb, 320 . . 464, 

524, 528, 530 
Lara, R. r. (1796), 6 T. R. 565 . . 604, 619 
Urkin, R. v. (1854), Dears. 865 276, 

296 
Lamer, R. r. (1880), 14 Cox, 497 . . 614 
Latham v. R. (1864), 5 B. & S. 635 88, 

91, 128, 222, 1290 
Latimer, R. r. (1851), 15 Q. B. 1077 151, 

1134 

(1886), 17 Q. B. D. 

359. .701, 798, 842, 845 
Laugher, R. r. (1846), 2C.4K. 225 81 , 

883 
Laughton v. Sodor & Man (Bishop 

of) (1872), L. R. 4 P.C. 495 . . 1182 
Lannock r. Brown (1819), 2 B. A 

Aid. 592.. 811 
Laurent, R. r. (1898), G2 J. P. 250 828 
Lautourr.Teesdale (1816), 8 Taunt. 

830 . . 1174 
Lavender, R. r. (1793), 2 East, P. C. 

566.. 461 
Lavey, R. r. (1776), 1 Leach, 153 . . 965 

(1850), 8 C. 4 K. 26 . . 1048, 

1050, 1066 
Lavey r. R. (1851), 17 Q. B. 496 . . 280, 

290 1066 
Lavie r. Phillips (1776), 3 Burr.' 

1776.. 1145 
Law, R r. (1862), 2 F. * F. 836 . . 28 

(1900), 1 Q. B. 605 . . 269, 

1263, 1270 



xc 



Table of Cain. 



TAQE 

Lawes, R. r. (1843), 1 C. & K. 62 . . 634, 

686,639 
I/iwford r. Davis (1878), 4 P. D.61 1175 
Lawlcv, R. r. (1731), 2 Str. 904 . . 84, 

146, 1078, 1235m 
Lawlor. K. r. (1853), G Cox, 187 

(Ir.) . . 1066 
Lawrence r. Hedger (1810), 3 Taunt. 

14.. 894 

— r. Smith (1822), Jacob, 

471.. 1023 

— R. r. (1830), 4 C. k P. 

231 . . 632, 636 

. (1866), 4 F. 4 F. 

901.. 123, 124 

(1877), 36 L. T. 404 601 

Laws r. Eltringham (1881), 8 Q. B. 

D. 283.. 701 
Lawson, R. r. (1905), 1 K. B. 541. . 590 
Layburn v. Crisp (1838), 4 M. k W. 

320.. 363 
Layer, R. r. (1722), 16 St. Tr. 93 . . 306, 

337, 989 
Layton, R. r. (1849), 4 Cox, 149 . . 23, 

181 940 
Lea r. Charrington (1889), 23 Q. B. ' 

D. 45, 272 . . 922 
- - R. r. (1837), 2 Mood. 9 . . 174, 291 
Leach r. Simpson (1839), 6M.AW. 

309.. 371 
Leafe, R. r. (1738), Andr. 226 . . 70, 120 
Leak's Case (1606), 12 Co. Rep. 15 722 
Leake, R. r. (1833), 5 B. A Ad. 469 

1228 1225 
Leatham, R. r. (1860), 8 Cox,' 425. .' 143 

(1861), 3 E. <fc E. 

658.. 141, 336 
Leatherbarrow, R. r. (1867), 10 Cox, 

637.. 1142 
Leckhampton Quarries Co. r. Sal- 
linger (1904), 68 J. P. Rep. 

464 • 1223 
Ledbctter, R. r. (1850), 3 C. k K. 

108.. 371 
Lcdbitter, R. r. (1825), I Mood. 76 1094 
Ledger, R. r. (1862), 2 F. k F. 857 800 
Leddington, R. r. (1839), 9 C. 4 P. 

79 . . 18, 1301 
Ledgingham, R. r. (1670), 1 Vent. 

97. 104 . . 223m 
Ledwith r. Catenae (1783). Cald. 

291 . • 894 
Lee. R. r. (1600), 1 St. Tr. 1408 ! ! 939 

(1689), Cas. (K. B.) temp. 

Hard*. 371, cU. 637 

(1766), 1 Rubs. Cr, (6th 

ed.) 368 . . 409, 1061 

(1804), 5 Esp. 123 . . 997 

(1818), R. k R. 8C1 . . 390 

(1834), 6 C. A P. 536 . . 1307 

■ (1840), 2 M. k Rob. 281 728 

(1818), 3 Cox, 80 .. 733 

(1859), 8 Cox, 238 . . 603 

(1863), L k C. 809 . . 599 

(1864), 4 F. 4 F. 63 . . 371, 372, 

373 



TAGS 

Lee, R. r. (1864), L. <fc C. 418 . . 596, 602 
(1876), 1 Q. B. D. 198 . . 1234 

— v. Bayes (1856), 18 C. B. 599. . 264 

— r. Boothby (1665), 1 Keb. 720 366 

— r. Butler (1898), 2 Q. B. 318 . . 269 

— r. Clarke (1802), 2 Eatt, 333 . . 78 

— r. Dangar (1892), 1 Q. B. 231 ; 

2Q. B.337 .. 1084 

— r. Gansel (1774), 1 Cowp. 1 . . 627 

— r. Hindoo (1816), 17 Taunt. 188 436 
Lees Case (1671), 1 Ventr. 105 . . 1251a 
Leecb, R. r. (1821), 3 Stark. (N. P.) 564 

(1856), Dears. 642 . . 609 

Leeds r. Cook (1803), 4 Esp. 256 . . 412 
Leefe, R. r. (1809), 2 Camp. 184 . . 1060 
Lees, R. r. (1858), E. B. k E. 828. . 279, 

282 
Lefroy, R. r. (1872), L. R. 8 Q. B. 

134 . . 1097 
Lergett, R. r. (1838), 8 C. 4 P. 191 796 
Lehwess, R. v. (1904), 140 Cent. Cr. 

Ct Sess. Pap. 731 . . 1082 
Leicestershire Justice*, R. r. (1813), 

1 M. 4 Sel. 442 . . 227 
Leigh, R. r. (1764), 1 Leacb, 52 . . 519 

(1866), 4 F. * F. 915. . 27 

Le Mesurier r. Le Mesuricr (1895), 

App. Cas. 517.. 1179 
Le Neve r. Mile End (Vestry) ( 1858), 

8E. cB. 1054.. 1224 
Leng, R. r. (1858), 1 F. 4 F. 77 . . 1319 

(1870), 34 J. P. 309 . . 1127 

Lennard, R. ». (1772), 1 Leach, 85 . . 982 
Lennox r. Stoddart (1902), 2 K. B. 

21 . . 1204, 1205 
Leonard, R. r. (1842) (unreported) 640 

(1848), 1 Den. 804 . . 615 

Lesley, R. r. (I860), Bell, 220 . . 40, 891, 

896 
Leslie, Export*, /feGuertier (1882), 

20 Ch. D. 131 . . 
Lester r Jenkins (1828), 8 B. <fc C. 

329 
Lever, R. r. (1888), 1 Wil. Wol. * 

Hod. 85 . . 
Leverson r. R. (1869), L. R. 4 Q. B. 

894.. 
Levett, R. r. (1689), Cro. Car. 588, 

cit. . . 33, 7% 
Levi r. Levi (1883), 6 C. k P. 239 . . 1280 

— R. r. (1866), L. «fc C. 597 . . 867, 

1143 
Levine, R. r. (1867), 10 Cox. 374 . . 603 
Levinger r. R. (1870), L. R. 3 P. C. 

282.. 198, 200 
Lew, R. r. (1819), 2 Stark. (N. P.) 

458.. 297, 1287 

(1854), 6 Cox, 482 . . 279, 282 

(1858), 8 Cox, 73 . . 1819 

Levy r. Edwards <1828), 1 C. k P. 

40 . . 838 

Lewen, R. r. (1886), 2 Lewin, 161. . 249 

Lewis, R. r. (1679), 7 St. Tr. 250 . . 101 

(1718), 1 Str. 70 . . 1045 

(1726), 2 Str. 704 .. 131 

(1754), Fost. U6 ., 713 



264 
363 
131 
125 



Table of Cam. 



xci 



PACK 

Lewis, R. r. (1769), 4 Burr. 2456 . . 190 

(1827), 2 C. 4 P. 623. . 631 

(1833), 6 C. * P. 161. . 816 

(1840), 9 CAP. 523.. 821 

(Gidwalader) (1840) 

(unreported) . . 721 

(1857), Dears. A. B. 

182 . . 87, 41 

(1857), Dears. & B. 

326.. 278 

(1869), 11 Cox, 404 . . 1280 

(1871), 12 Cox, 163 . . 1067 

Lewis, Ex parte (1888), 21 Q. B. D. 

191.. 1100 

— p. Levy (1858), E. B. & E. 

537.. 996 

— r. Owen (1894), 1 Q. B. 102 862 

— r. Sapio(l827), M. 4 M. 89 883 

— r. Walter (1821), 4 B. * Aid. 

605.. 996 
LeyfiekTs Case (1610), 10 Co. Rep. 

92 6, 93 . . 345, 859, 380 
Leyman r. Latimer (1877), 3 Ex. D. 

16.. 1127 
Leyton, K. r. (1640), Cro. Car. 584 122 
Uebman r. Pooley (1816), 1 Stark. 

(N. P.) 167.. 386 
Light, R. r. (1857), Dean. 4 B. 332 808 
Ugbtfoot r. Cameron (1777), 2 W. 

BI. 1118.. 418 

- R. r. (1856), 6 K. * B. 822 1046 
UUyman, R. r. (1896), 2 Q. B. 167 319, 

320, 911 
Usee, R. r. (1873), 12 Cox, 451 . . 610 
Lincoln, R. r. (1820), R. k R. 421. . 1062 
Lincoln (Mayor of), R. r. (1838), 8 

A. AE. 65.. 1238 
Lincoln's (Earl of) Case, Sir W. 

Jones, 152 . . 405 
Undo r. Belisario (1795), 1 Hagg. 

Consist. Kep. 216 . . 1172 
Lindsay r. Cundy (1878), 3 App. 

Cas. 459 . . 269 

- R. r. (1704), 14 St Tr. 987 21 
(1902), 66 J. P. 605 1171, 

1178 
Udm. R. r. {\M4), 1C. «K. 393. . 911 

(1902), 1 K. B. 199 . . 867, 

1246 
Unford Fitzroy, R. r. (1849), 13 

Q. B. 240.. Ill, 112 
Ungate, R. p., 1 PhilLEr. (7th ed.) 

414.. 334 
Iinsberg, R. r. (1905), 69 J. P. 107 892 
Linton, R. p. (1840), 1 Russ. Cr. 

(6th ed.) 823.. 1234 
Lister, B. r. (1856), Dears. * B. 118 571 

(1857), Dears. 4 B. 209 1186 

Uthgo, R. r. (1818), R. A R. 367 . . 646 
Uttte, R. r. (1821), R. A R. 480 . . 183 

(1867), 10 Cox, 559 . . 454 

(1883), 15 Cox, 819 .. 418 

Urerpool (Mayor, etc. of), R. v. 

(1802), 3 East, 86.. 1226 
Uoyd r. Pauingham (1809), 16 Yes. 

59, 81 . . 405 



FAQS 

Uoyd, R. p. (1767), 2 East, P. C. 

1122.. 75, 582, 1117 

(1808), 4 Esp. 200 ..1181 

(1808), 1 Camp. 260 . . 1222 

(1880), 4 C. 4 P. 233. . 828 

(1832), 4 B. A Ad. 135 227 

(1836), 7 CAP. 818.. 911 

(1887), 19 Q. B. D. 213 1046 

Uoyd Jones, R. v. (1838), 8 C. A P. 

288.. 573 
Lock, R. p. (1872), L. R. 2 C. C. R. 

10 . . 919, 926 
Locke-King p. Woking Urban Dis- 
trict Council (1897), 14 T. L. R. 

32 1217 
Locker, R. r. (1804), 5 Esp. 107 .'. 
Lockett, R. r. (1772), 1 Leacb, 94. . 713, 

736 

(1836), 7 C. A P. 300 18, 

1249 
Lockbart, R. r. (1785), 1 Leach. 386 336 
Lockler, R. p. (1864), 4F.4F. 165 809 
Locost,' R. p. (1664), Kel. (J.) 80 . . 634 
Loggen, R. p. (1718), 1 Str. 74 . . 1084 
Lofley, R. r. (1812), 2 CI. A F.567» 

1179, 1180 
London, R. r. (1871), 12 Cox, 60 . . 1051, 

1056 
London (Mayor, etc., of), R. r. 

(1719), 1 Str. 307 . . . . 857 

(1844), 5Q. B. 565.. .. 376 

(1858), E. B. A E. 609 . . 270 

(1870), L. R. 4 Q. B. 371 . . 265, 269 

(1866), 16 Q. B. D. 772 . . 1127 

(1886), 16 Cox, 77 . . . . 7 

London and Globe Finance Corpora- 
tion, Re (1903), 1 Ch. 728) . . 587, 590 

London, Brighton, etc., Rail Co. r. 

Truman (1885), 11 App. Cas. 45.. 1185 
London County Council p. Worley 

(1894), 2Q. B. 826.. 94 
Long. R. p. (1604), 5 Co. Rep. 121 . . 72, 84 

- (St. John), R. p. (1880-1), 4 

C. A P. 398, 428 . . 788 
Longbottom, R. p. (1849), 3 Cox, 489 800 
Longden, R. p. (1812), K. A R. 228 808 
Longland, R. p. (1896), 6 Queensland 

L. J. 66 . . 198w 
Longstreetb, R. r. (1826), 1 Mood. 

187.. 448, 451, 45-1 
Longton Gas Co., R. r. (1860), 2 E. 

A E. 651 . . 1216 
Lonsdale (Lord) p. Rigg (1857), 1 H. 

AN. 928.. 438 
— R. p. (1847), 2 Cox, 222 . . 737 

(1864), 4 F. A F. 66 

76, 90, 486 
Lookup r. R. (1766), 4 Bro. Pari. 

Cas. 332.. 85 
Loom, R. p. (1827), 1 Mood. 160 . . 800, 

469 
Loose, R. p. (1860), Bell, 269 . . 64 
Lopez, R. p. (1858), Dears. A B. 525 38, 

40, 42, 48 
Lordsmere, R. p. (1850), 15 Q. B. 689 

1223, 1224 



xcu 



Table of Comb. 



iugk 
Lordsuierc, IS. r. (18*0;, 16 Cox, 65 

1224, 1230, 1233 
Lort r. Hutton (1876), 45 L. J. (M. C.) 

95.. 392 
Loughborough Highway Bd. r. Cnrzon 

(1886), 16 Q.B. D. 565 . . 1211 
Loughran, K. r. (1839), 1 Crawf. t 

Dix. (C. C. Ir.) 79 . . 1078 
Lovat (Lord), R. t>. (1746), 18 St. Tr. 

529 . . 306, 307, 940 
Loveless, R, r. (1834), 2M.4 Rob. 

349. . 1001, 1002 
Lovell r. Beauchamn (1894), App. 

Cas. 607.. 23, 1145 

— K. r. (1839), 2 M. t Rob. 286 560, 

574 

(1881),8Q.B.D.185.. 447, 

456 525 
Lovett, R. r. (1839), 9 C. & P. 432 *186, 

201, 416, 990, 993 

(1870), 11 Cox. 602 . . 263 

Lovibond, R. r. (1871), 19 W. R. 758 4 
Low, R. r. (1866), 10 Cox, 168 . . 466 
Lowdens v. Keaveney (1903), 2 Ir. 

Rep. 82.. 1216 
Lowe r. Joliffe (1762), 1 W. Bl. 365 382 

— R. r. (1883), 52 L. J. (M. C.) 

122.. 351, 367 

(1850), 3 C. A K. 123 800,802 

Lowicke, R. t>. (1696), 13 St Tr. 267 306, 

940 
Lowrie, R. t?. (1867), L. R. 1 C.C. R. 

61.. 500 
Lows r. Telford (1876), 1 App. Cus. 

414.. 1111 
Lucas, R. r. (1823), 2 Fox £ Sm. 

(K. B. Ir.)30.. 131 
Luck, R. f*. (1862). 3 F. & F. 483 . . 14 
Luckhuret, R. v. (1858), Dears. 245 832 
Lucy, R. v. (1842), G. & Mar. 511. . 1264 
Ludlow (Mayor, etc.) v. Charlton 

(1840), 9 C. <k P. 242 . . 863 
Lumlcy, R. r. (1869), L.R.1C.C.R, 

196 . . 342, 844, 1177 
Lutterell r. Reynell (1671), 1 Mod. 

282 264 
Lunoy, R. r. (1854), 6 Cox, 477 .! 818 
Lyell r. Kennedy (1889), 14 App. 

das. 487 . . 316, 854, 1178 
Lynch, R. v. (1832), 5 C. <fc P. 824 795 

(1897), 1 Q. B. 61 . . 1163 

« (1902), 19 Dec. . . 100, 187, 

872 

(1903), 1 K. B. 444 . . 21, 

37, 121, 122, 139, 930, 945, 

946 947 
Lynes, Re (1893), 2 Q. B. 1113 . . 'l 145 
Lynn, R. v. (1788), 2 T. R. 733 . . 1208 

(1824), 1 C. A P. 527 . . 

Lyon r. Fishmongers Co. (1876), 1 

App. Cas. 662 . . 1220 

— R. r. (1793), 2 Leach, 597, 808 789 

( 1793), 2 Leach, 597, 608 74 

(1813), R.sB. 255, . 717, 727 

(1834-5), C. 4 Mar. 217 

520, 1215 



VXGM, 

Lyons. R. r. (1778), 1 Leach, 1*5.. 626. 

- (1841), C. A Mar. 217 553 

(1858), Bell, 38 .. 648 

(1863), 9 Cox, 290 . . 367 

Lyons r. Wilkin* (1896), 1 Ch. 811 1162 

(1899), ICh. 255 1161 



MABBETT, R. v. (1851), 5 Cox, 389 784, 

886 
Mabel, R. r. (1840), 9 CAP. 474.. 864 
Mabin, R. r. (1901), 20 N. Z. L. R. 

451.. 1119 
Macanler, R. c. (1783), 1 Leach, 287 624 
Macarthy, R. r. (1842), C. & Mar. 

625.. 123 
McAthfv, R. r. (1862), L. 6 C. 260 551 
McCabe'v. Joynt (1901), 2 Ir. Rep. 

116.. 1182 
McCafferty, R. r. (1867), 10 Cox, 

603.. 407, 940, 941 
MacCann,R.f.(1798),27St.Tr.899 946 
McCarthy,R. r.(1903), 2 Ir. Rep. 146 814, 

1161 
McCaitie, R. r. (1859), 11 Ir. Rep. 

C. L. 188. .110, 115 
McCarther, R. p. (1793), 1 Peake, 211 

(3rd ed.) . . 389, 406, 1055, 1061 
McClarena, R. r. (1849), 3 Cox, 425 32, 

1307 
McClatchie r. Haslam (1891), 17 

Cox, 402 . . 1090n 
Macclesfield (Earl), R. v. (1725), 16 

St. Tr. 767 . . 1015, 1081 

r. Starkey (1684), 

lOSt Tr. 1329.. 103 
Macclesfield, R. r. (1831), 2 B. A Ad. 

870 . . 627 
McConnell, R. r. (1844), 1C.4K. 

371 . . 735 
McCormick R. r. (1864), 17 Ir. C. L. 

R.411.. Ill 
McCraw r. Gontrv (1812), 3 Camp. 

232.. 381 
McCullev, R. r. (1838), 2 Mood. 84 300, 

469, 470 
Macdaniel, R. r. (1756), 19 St Tr. 

745 . . 16, 527, 783, 1281, 1292, 1303, 

1304 
McDermott, R. r. (1813), R. * R. 

356.. 841 

— Jfc(l866),L.R.lP.C. 

260; 2 P. C. 841.. 1095 

— R. r. (1899), 24 Vict. 

L. R. 686 . . 1063n 
McDonagb, R. v., Carr. Snpp. 23 . . 49 
Macdonald, R. v. (1747), 18 St. Tr. 

857 . . 21, 988 

(1861), L. AC. 86 566 

(1885), 15Q.B.D. 

323 . . 23, 459 
McDonnell, R. r. (1828), 1 Hud. * 

Br. (Ir.) 439 . . 290 
Blscdougsllr. Knight(1889), 14 App. 

Cas. 194.. 996, 1133 



Table of Cases. 



XClll 



1'AUB 

iiacdougall r. Knight ( 1890), 25 Q. B. 

D. 1 .. 1133 
Hare, R. r. (1886), 50 J. P. 776 .. 903 
U'DoweU r. Dublin (Mayor, etc.) 

(1903), 2 Ir. Rep. 541 . .343, 701 
McEacany, R. r. (1878), 2 L. R. Ir. 

236.. 138 
Vl 4 £Tin, R. r. (1858), Bell, 20 . . 1318, 

1320» 
Macferzou r. Thoytes (1790), Peike 

(3rd ed.), 29 . . 383n 
McGaranB, R. r. (1852), 6 Cox, 64 416, 

919 
McGee R. r. (1895), 6 Queensland 

L. J. 151.. 91 On 
UcGinoes, R. r. (1870), 11 Cox, 391 33 
McGowen, R. r. (1858), 11 Ir. C. L. R. 

207, c'U. . . 200 
MacGrath, R. r. (1870), L. R. 1 

C. C. R. 205 . . 447, 456, 525 
MeGiatb, R. r. (1881), 14 Cox, 598 668 
MacGregor, R. r. (1802), R. 4 R. 23 560 

(1844), 1 C. 4 K. 

429.. 39, 546 
MacGregor r. Thwaites (1824), 8 

B.AC. 24.. 995 
McGrowther, R. v. (1746), 18St.Tr. 

391 . . 15, 30, 944 
HeGirire, R. r. (1801), 2 East, P. a 

1002.. 715 

(1898), 34New Brans. 

430 . . 98, 195n 
MscGaire, R. r. (1645), 4 St. Tr. 653 929 
UeHagh, K. v. (1901), 2 Ir. Rep. 

569 .. 989, 997, 1023, 1095, 1096 
Machynlleth and Penmegoes, R. r. 

(1822), 2 B. 4 C. 166 . . 1237 
Mcintosh, R. r. (1800), 2 Leach, 833 717, 

733 
Mclatyre, R. r. (1847), 2 Cox, 379 781 
MeSak R. r. (1868), L R. 1 a C. R. 

125.. 453 
Mackalley, R. v. (1611), 9 Co. Rep. 

67 6. . 16, 216, 303, 779, 1299 
Mackarty, R. v. (1706), 2 Ld. Raym. 

1179 ; 3 ib. 325 .. 2, 1163, 1279 

r f R. p. (1804), R. & R. 71 . . 708 

(1868), 11 Cox, 148.. 321 

J1893), 17 Cox, 713. . 554 

R. v. (1829), Jebb 

(C. Ct. Ir.), 99 . . 636 
McKeey, R. p. (1826), 1 Mood. 130 729 
McKeerer, R. p. (1871), Ir. Rep. 5 

C. L. 86.. 94, 662 

(1903), 114 L. T.J. 

318.. 257 
McKeerit, R. r. (1880) (unreported) 1161 
UcKenzie, R. *. (1820), R. 4 R. 429 6, 

(1892), 2 Q. B. 619 1162 

VeKenoe r. Hawke (1902), 2 K. B. 

216 . . 1204 
l&dkerel, R. v. (1831), 4 C. 4 P. 448 676 
McKcnm B. v. (1792), 5 T. R. 316, 

7 at. . . 1055 

JfetiiD, R. r. (1850), 5 Cox, 216 . . 269 



Hackney, R. r. (1903), 29 Vict. L. K. 

22 . . 900 903 
Maclane, R. r. (1797), 26 St. Tr. 722 ' 946 
Macleod r. St. Aobyn (1899), A pp. 

Cas. 549.. 1094, 1095 

— r. Wakley (1828), 3 C. 4 P. 

311.. 1131 
McLeod v. Att.-Gen. for N. S. W. 

(1891), App. Cas. 455.. 87 

— R. r. (1802), 2 East, 202 . . 144 

(1874), 12 Cox, 534.. 787, 

788 
McLonghiin, R. r. (1838), 8 C. 4 P. 

635.. 841 

— lie (1878), 1 L. R. Ir. 

421.. 1174 
McMahon, R. r. (1875), 13 Cox, 275 

(/r.).. 553 

(1894), 13N.S.W. 

Rep. (Law) 131 974, 

975 
McMakin, R. r. (1808), R. 4 R. 333» 13 
Macnamara, R.P. (1890), 20 Ontario, 

489.. 1197 
McNamee, R. tr. (1832), 1 Mood. 368 461 
McNaughteo, R. p. (1881), 14 Cox, 

576.. 798, 1098 
Macnanghton, R. p. (1848), 4 St. Tr. 

(N. S.) 847 . . 25, 26, 27 
McXee r. Persian Investment Cor- 
poration (1889), 44 Ch. D. 306 1207 
McPheraon, R. p. (1857), Dears. 4 

B. 197 . . 219, 640, 1295 

— Att.-Gen.forN. S. W. 

p. (1870), L. R. 3. 
F. C. 268..72, 833, 836 
McQueen r. Jackson (1903), 2 K.B. 

163.. 1165 
McQnire p. Western Morning News 

(1903), 2K. B. 100.. 1132 
McRoe, R. r. (1838), 8 C. 4 P. 641 911 
Madan, R. p. (1780), 1 Leach, 223. . 1043 
Madercine, R. p. (1899), 20 N. S. W. 

Rep. (Law) 36 . . 1189n 
Maddock, R. p. (in cert.), 2 Ross. 

Cr. (6th ed.) 641 762.. 731 
Msddr, R.p. (1672), lYentr. 158.. 793 
Maden p. Catanach (1862), 7 H. 4 

N. 360 . . 889, 406 
Madge and Armstrong, R p. (1894), 

29 L. J. Newsp. 801 . . 108 
Madox, R. p. (1805), R. 4 R. 92 . . 519 
Magee, R. p. (tacert.), Rowe (K. B. 

Ir.), 416'.. 142 
Magellan Pirate*, The (1853), 1 Eccl. 

4 Adm. (Spinks) 81 . . 545 
Mahon, R. p. (1826), 4 A. 4 E. 576 152, 

838 
Mahony,- R. p. (18541, 6 Cox, 487 . . 717 
Mainwaring. See Manwaring. 
Major, R. p. (1796), 2 East, P. C. 

1118.. 537 
Makin p. Ait.-Gen. for N. S. W. 

(1894), App. Cos. 57 . . 296, 306, 307, 

308, 309, 810 
Male, R. r. (1893), 17 Cox, 69 .. 336 



XC1V 



Table of Cans. 



PACK 

Maltngs, R. v. (1838), 8C.i P. 242 210 
Mallison, R. p. (1902), 20 Cox, 204 438 
Mallory, K. p. (1884), 13 Q. B. D. 

33 830 
Maloney, R r. (1861), 9 Cox, 6, 26 779 
Mai ton L. B. v. Malton Fanners 

Trading Co. (1879), 4 Ex. D. 302 1184 
Manby r. Witt (1856), 18 C. B. 544 1132 
Manchester (Justices), R. r. (1899), 

1 Q. B. 671 . . 147 

- (Clerk of Peace of), R. r. 
(1889), Stones Justice 

(35th ed.), 42 . . 6, 260 

- (Mayor, etc.), R. r. (1857), 

7 E. A B. 453 . . 135 
Mankletow, R. r. (1853), Dears. 159 899, 

900 
Manley, R. p. (1844), 1 Cox, 104 . . 12„ 17 

- (incert.), Rowe (lr. 

K. B.), 646 . . 147 
Mann r. Brodie (1885), 10 App. Cas. 

378, 386 . . 1223 
— R. r. (1815), 4 M. A Sel. 837 292 

(1885), 49 J. P. 743 . . 324 

Manner*, R. r. (1837), 7 C. A P. 801 13 

— f . Postan ( 1803), 3 B. A P. 

343 . . 

— r. T\ ler (1902), 1 K. B. 

585.. 1166 
Manning, R. r. (1672), Sir T. Ravm. 

212. . 

(1849), 1 Den. 467.'. 

(1849), 2 C. A K. 

903n..l5, 20,81,32, 

1307 

(1852), Dears. 21 .. 441 

(1871), L. R. 1 C. C. 

R. 838.. 654 

' (1883), 12 Q. B. D. 

241.. 215, 1285, 1286 
Mannion, R. r. (1846). 2 Cox, 158 . . 39 
Mausell r. R. (1857), 8 St Tr. (N. S.) 

831 . . 94, 192, 199, 207, 
281, 281, 289,291 
Mansfield, R. r. (1841), C. A Mar. 

140.. 76, 307, 435 
Manwaring, R. r. (1856), Dear*. A 

B. 132.. 344, 386, 1170, 1172 
Manzano, R. r. (1860), 2 F. A F. 64 210 
Mapleback, lie (1877), 4 Q. B. D. 

150.. 1090m 
Moppin Bros. r. Liberty A C>o. (1903), 

1 Cb. 118.. 1225 
March, R. r. (1828), 1 Moo*. 182 . . 
(1844), 2C. AK. 496.. 



380 



793 
198 



055 
835 
718 
629 



Marcus, R. r. (1816), 2 C. A K. 356 

.Margetts, R. r. (1801), 2 Leach, 930 

Markham v. Cobbe, Sir W. Jones, 

147; Noy.81.. 264 
Marks r. Beyfus (1890), 25 Q. B. D. 

494.. 403 

— <\ Fro^ley (1898), 1 Q. B. 

896,888.. 896 

— R. r. (1802), 3 East, 157 . . 1002 
(1866), 10 Cox, 867 . . 64, 

297,560 



I 



TAGS 

Markust, R. r. (1864), 4 F. A F. 356 788, 

800 
Marlborough (Duke), Ex parte 

(1844), 6 Q. B. 955 .. 147, 1097 
Marriott, R. v. (1838), 8 C. A P. 425 2, 

784 
Marsden, Ex parte (1876), 2 Cb. D. 

786.. 1138, 1146, 1147 

- R. r. (1829), M. A M. 439 144 

(1868), L. R. 1 C. C. 

R. 131 .. 808, 864 

(1891), 2 Q. B. 149. . 906, 

911, 915, 917 
Marsella, R. r. (1901), 17 T. L. R. 

164.. 370 
Marsh p. Collnet (1798), 2 Esp. 665 357, 

380 

— r. Keating (1834), 1 Mont. A 

A. 592.. 263 

— r. Loader (1863), 14 C. B. 

(N. 8.) 535.. 22 

— R. v. (1837), 6 A. 4b £.286.. 94, 

101, 103, 122 

(1849), 1 Den. 605 . . 616 

(1862), 8 F. A F. 523 . . 561 

Marshall, R. v. (1804), R. A R. 75 . . 714 

(1811), Id East, 822 149 

(1827), 1 Mood. 158 73 

(1841),C.AMar.l47 371 

(1855), 4 E. A B. 475 147 

(1870), 11 Cox, 490 567 

(1899), 34 L.J.N. 83 395 

(1899), 84 L. J. N. 

48. .125, 293 
Marson r. L. C. A D. Rail. Co. (1868), 

L. R. 6 Eq. 101 . . 64G 
Martin, R. r. (incert.), Rove (lr. 

K. B.), 726 . . 147 

(1777), 1 Leach, 171 . . 439 

(1801), 2 Leach, 923 . . 976 

(1806), R. A R. 108 . . 62G 

- — (1811), R. A R. 198 . . 1031 
(1817), R. A R. 324 . . 770 

(1827), 3 CAP. 211.. 801 

(1832), 6 CAP. 128.. 781 

( 1834), 6 C. 4 P. 662 . . 312, 

910 

(1836), 7 CAP. 549.. 712 

(1838), 8 A. A E. 481.. 70, 

78, 504 

(1839), 9 CAP. 213.. S, 

67 

(1848).6St.Tr.(N.S.) 

925.. 78, 93, 94, 182, 
204, 205 

(1849), 1 Den. 398 . . 50, 

165, 549 

(1867), L.R.1C.CR. 

56.. 613 

(1869), L.R. 1C.C.R. 

214 . . 488, 978 

(1872), L. R. 1 C. C. R. 

378 . . 134, 213, 275, 276, 
278 28 ■* 

(1880), 5 Q. B. D. 34 'e04~ 

714 



Table of Cases. 



lev 



PACK 

Martin, R. r. (1881), 8 Q. B. D. 54. . 785, 

817 845 

(1889), 17 Cox, 36 . . ' 883 

Martindale r. Falkner (1846), 2 C. B. 

706 . . 344 
Mason, R. r. (1756), Foot. 132 .. 786, 

795 

(1792), 1 East, 180» 81 

(1792), 2 Eaat, P. C. 

975ft . . 74 

(1788), 2 T. R. 581 78, 

280,596 

(1820), R. A R. 419 524 

(1848), 2 C. & K. 622 751, 

755 

Maasoy, R. r. (1862), L. A C. 206 . . 1142 

— r. Morris (1894), 2 Q. B. 412 1252 

Master r. Miller (1791), 4 T. R. 320 264 

Matters, R. r. ( 1848), 1 Den. 832 . . 272, 

278, 568 
Martin, R. r. (1834), 6 C. 4 P. 396 801 
Mather, R. r. (1733), 2 Barnard. 249 147 
Matter*, R. r. (1818), 1 B. k Aid. 

362 . . 80 
Matthew*, R. r. (1719), 15 St. Tr. 

1323.. 992 

(1850), 1 Den. 596 32, 

55L 

(1873), 12 Cos, 489 446 

(1876), 14 Cox, 5 677 

Mannsell, R. v. (1839), 1 Ir. Law 

Rep. 257.. 148 

Mawber, R. r. (1796), 6 T. R. 619 291, 

292, 23)3* 295, 355, 1050, 1071, 1281, 

1285, 1287 
Mawgan in Meneage, R. r. (1838), 

8 A A E. 496 .. 6, 226, 1212 
Mawgridge, R. p. (1706), 17 St.Tr. 

67 . . 789, 792, 794, 795 

Mar, R. n. (1779), 1 Leach, 227 .. 802 

' (1861), L. * C. 13 . . 566 

(1867), 10 Cox, 448 . . 824 

(1900), 64 J. P. 570 . . 66 

Mayburr, R. r. (1864), 4 F. <fe F. 

90. • 1217 
Mavers, R. r. (1872), 12 Cox, 31 1 ! ! 908 
Mavhew, R. r. (1834), 6 C. * P. 815 1061 
Mayle, R. p. (1868), UCox, 150.. 567 
Mai nard, R. r. (1774), 2 East, P. C. 

501.. 629 

(1812), R. & R. 240 163, 

824 
Mazaaora, R. p. (1815), R. 4 R. 291 348, 

718 
Uazeau, R. r. (1840), 9 C. 4 P. 676 12, 

715 
MeaJ, R. r. (1823), 3 D. <fe R. 301 132 

(1824), 2 B. <fe C. 605 . . 828 

(1831), 4 C. * P. 535 502 

Me^d r. Robinson (1743), Willes, 

422 890 

— r. Young (1790), 4 T. R. 28 714 

Meade, R. r. (1903), 19 T. L. R. 540 1107, 

1187 
Meadham, R. r. (1848). 2 C. «fc K. 

633.. 1246 



TAGS 

Meadows, R. t\ (1844), 1 C. <fe K/ 

899.. 900 

(1856), 2 Jur. (N. 

S.)716.. 209 
Meagher, R. r. (1848), 6 St. Tr. 

(N. S.)571.. 998 

Meakin, R. p. (1836), 7 C. & P. 297 29 

(1869), 10 Cox, 270 602 

Meal, R. r. (1848), 3 Cox, 70 . . 638 

Mean, R.p. (1904), 69 J. P. Rep. 27 307. 

1202, 1204 
Meany, R. v. (1862), L. & C. 213 . . 221 

(1867), 10 Cox, 606 

(/r.).. 951 
Mean, R. r. (1851), 2 Den. 79 . . 922, 

1279, 1287 
Medland, R. r. (1851), 5 Cox, 292 458 
Medley, R. r. (1834), 6 C. <fc P. 292 1183 
Medlicot p. Joyner (1669), 1 Mod. 4 380 
Mee p. Cruikshank (1902), 20 Cox. 

210.. 228, 231, 892 
— f. Reid (1791), Peake (3rd ed.). 

83 389 
Meek, R. r. (1840), 9 C. A P. 513 ". ! 1051, 

1061 
Meekins r. Smith (1791), 1 H. Bl. 

629 . . 413 
Bleers r. Lord Stourton (1711), 1 P. 

Wins. 146 . . 405 
Megson, R. p. (1840), 9 C. & P. 418 319, 

822 
Meigh, R. p. (1857), 7 Cox, 401 . . 739 
Melltsu, R. p. (1805), R. & R. 80 567, 561 
Mellor, R. r. (1805), R. & R. 144 . . 44 

(1830), 1 B. & Ad. 82 1222 

(1858), Dears. 4 B. 468 200, 

276 
Melville (Lord), R. r. (1806), 29 

St. Tr. 549 . . 347 
Menage, R. r. (1862), 8 F. k F. 310 536 
Mence, R. p. (1841), C. 4 Mar. 234 51 1 
Mendez p. Villa Real (1734), Cos. 

(K. B.) temp. Hardw. 18 3C4 
Mercer p. Woodgate (1869), L. R. 5 

Q. B. 26.. 1224 
Merceron, R. p. (1818), 2 Slark. 

(N. P.) 366 . . 329 
Meredith, R. p. (1803), R. & R.46 . . 1088 

(1838), 8 C. & P. 

589 . . 836, 918 
Merionethshire, R. p. (1844), 6 Q. B. 

343 . . 1242 
MerWale p. Carson (1888), 20 

Q. B. D. 275.. 1132 
Merrinian p. Chippenham (Hundred) 

(1768), 2 East, P. C. 709 . . 526 
Merry p. G.een (1841), 7 M. 4 W. 

623 . . 446 
— R. v. (1847), 2 Cox, 240 . . 1246 

(1900), 19 Cox, 442 . . 820 

Merthjr Trdfil (Justices), R. v. 

(i894), 10 T. L. R. 875 . . 914 
Messenger, R. p. (1668), 6 St. Tr. 

879 . . 948, 944 
Messingham, R. p. (1830), 1 Mood. 

257 . . 87, 551 



XCV1 



Table of Cases. 



TAGS 

Metcalf, R. r. (1835), 1 Blood. 483 501 

(1848), 3 Cox, 220 . . 200, 

213 
Metcalfe (Johnson), K. r. (1862) 

(unreported) . . 873 
Metropolitan Asylums Managers r. 
Hill (1881), 6 App. Cas. 

193.. 1183, 1185 
Metropolitan Bank r. Pooler (1885), 

10 App. Cas. 210.. 1079 
Metropolitan Police Commissioner 
p. Donovan (1908), 1 
K. B. 895 .. 1317, 1322, 

1326 
Meunier, lit (1894), 2 Q. B. 415 . . 891 
Mexborough (Earl) v. Whitwood 
Chemical Manure Co. (1897), 2 

Q. B. Ill . . 899 
Miard, R. p. (1844), 1 Cox, 22 . . 533, 534 
Michael. R. r. (1840), 9 C. 4 P. 356 12, 

787, 816 
Michell r. Brown (1858), 1 E. 4 E. 

267.. 4, 6 
— R. r. (1880), 60 L. J. (M. C.) 

76 . . 1143 
Middleditch, R. r. (1845), 1 Den. 

92.. 537 
Middlehurst (Re Bowman), R. r. 

(1757), I Burr. 399 304 
Middlesex (JJ.) R. r. (1834), 5 B. 4 

Ad. 1113.. 94, 174 

(1843), 2 Dowl. (N. 8.) 

719 . . 97 
Middleship, R. p. (1851), 5 Cox, 275 786 
Middleton (Lord), R. r. (1713) . . 946 
MiddlttoD, R. p. (1873), L. R. 2 

C. C. R.38.. 448 
Midland Insurance C«>. v. Smith 

(1881), 6 Q. B. D. 661 265 
Midwinter, R. r. (1749), Post App. 

415. . 1299 
Mierre, R. r. (1771), 5 Burr. 2787* 1252m 
Migotti p. Colvill (1869), 4 C. P. D. 

233 . . 231, 892 
Mildrone, R. p. (1786), l Leach, 412 889, 

405, 406 
Miles, R. r. (1779), 1 Doug. 284 . . 145, 

150 

(1890), 24 Q. B. D. 423 170, 

171, 175, 177 
Miles p. Hatchings (1903), 2 K. B. 

714.. 692 
Milissich r. Lloyds (1877), 46 L. J. 

(C. P.) 404.. 996, 1133 
Millar, R. p. (1887), 7 C. & P. 666 48, 

491 492 
Millard, R. r. (1813), R. 4 R. 245 'dll, 

720 

(1853), Dears. 166 . . 1047 

Miller r. Race (1758), 1 Smith, L. C. 

(11th ed.) 463.. 268 
— R. r. (1772), 2 W. Bl. 797 . . 178, 

1043 

(1841), 2 Mood. 249 . . 663 

( 1853), 3 Cox, 853 (/r.) 651 

(1876), 13 Cox, 179 . . 901 



PAGE 

Miller, R. r. (1879), 14 Cox, 356 . . 218, 

815, 819, 840, 843 

(1896), 18 Cox, 54 . . 335 

(1901), 65 J. P. Rfp. 

313 . . 310, 885 
Millhouse, R. r. (1885), 15 Cox, 622 210 
Milligan r. Wedge (1840), 12 A. 4 

E. 737.. 466 
Millis, R. v. (1844), 10 CI. 4 F. 634 1170, 

1172, 1174, 1180 
Mills v. Collett (1829), 6 Bing. 85 . . 649 

— R. p. (1857), Dears. 4 B. 205 613 
Milner p. Maclean (1826), 2 C. A P. 

17.. 1111 

— R. p. (1850), 4 Cox, 275 . . 511 
Milnes, R. r. (1860), 2 F. 4 F. 10 . . 360, 

1065 
Milton, R. p. (1843), 1 C. * K. 58, 

59n . . 346, 852 

(1866), 10 Cox, 364 . . 740 

Minet r. Morgan (1*73), L. R. 8 Ch. 

App. 361 . . 401 
Minna Craig, The (1897), 1 Q. B. 

55.. 365 
Minton, R. r. (1786), 2 East, P. C. 

1021.. 305 
Mi rams r. "Our Dogs*' Publishing 

Co. (1901), 2 K. B. 564 . . 1092 
Mitchel, R. r. (1848), 6 St. Tr. (N. 

S.)645.. 141, 167 

(1848), 6 St. Tr. (N. 

S.) 599.. 88, 89, 182, 
198, 201, 949, 951 
Mitchell r. Johnson (1828), M. 4 M. 

176 . . 382 
— R. r. (1754), Fost 119 735 

(1842), 2 Q. B. 

686.. 44 

(1847), 1 Den. 

282m 713 

(1852), 2 Den. 

468 . . 529 

(1860), 2 F. 4 F. 

44.. 734 

(1892), 17 Cox, 

503 . . 322, 324 
Mizen, R. p. (1841), 2 M. 4 Rob. 

382.. 1228 
Moah, R. r. (1856), Dears. 626 . . 578 

(1858), Dears. 4 B. 550 703 

Mo&te, R. r. (1832), 8 B. 4 Ad. 237 187, 

197 
Mobbs, R. p. (1860), 2 F. 4 F. 18. . 123 
Moc'iford, R. r. (1868), 11 Cox, 16 341, 

436 
Moffatt, R. r. (1787), 2 East, P. C. 

954 . . 780 
Mogg, R. r. (1830), 4 C. 4 P. 364 693, 

816 
Mogul S3. Co. p. McGregor, Gow 4 

Co. (1892), App. Cas. 25 .. 1159, 

1281 
Moises r. Thomt>n (1799), 8 T. R. 

303 . . 356 
Moland, R. p. (1843), 2 Mood. 276 . . 16, 

596, 1310 



Table of Com*. 



xcvh 



TAQK 

Mole, K. r. (1844), 1 (\ 4 K. 417 . . 446 

Motion, R. r. (1758), Post. 188« . . 21 

Moaaghan, R. r. (1870), 11 Cox, COS 855 
Money, R. r. (1847), Greaves, Crim. 

Cons. Acts (2nd ed.), 112 475 

Monkhoose, R. r. (1849), 4 Cox, 55 29 
Monks r. Dykes (1839), 4 H. A W. 

567.. 625 
Monson 9. Tussands Ltd. (1894), 

1Q. B. 671.. 146, 1127 
— R, r. (1903), 67 J. P. Rep. 

267.. 214 
Montgomery Election Petition (1892), 

Day's'Etection Cases, 148, 151 29 

Moody, R. r. (1862), L. 4 C. 173 . . 740, 

Moone r. Rose (1869), L. R. 4 Q. B. 

486 • . 892 
Mooney, R. r. (1851), 5 Cox, 318 (Jr.) 322 

. 899 



Moore, fc. r/(1676),'2 Lev/ 179 
(1784), 1 Leach, 314.. 



14, 
451 
524 
984 
2, 



(1784), 1 Leach, 335 . . 

(1825), 2 CAP. 235.. 

(1882), 3 B. 4 Ad. 184 

1181, 1216 

(1852), 2 Den. 522 . . 882, 833 

(1852), 3 C. J: K. 319.. 29 

(1858), IF. 4 F. 73.. 720 

(I860), L. 4 C. 1 . . 445 

(1892), 61 L. J. (M. C.) 

80 . . 277, 405, 407, 408 

(1898), 14 T. L. R. 229 791 

Moores, R. r. (1836), 7 C. 4 P. 270 391 
Moorhonse, R. ». (1785), 4 Dougl. 

388 . 1088 
Moors, R. r. (1801), 6 East, 419n .' .* 317, 

1001 
Mopscy, R. r. (1868), 1 1 Cox, 143 . . 729 
Moran r. Pitt (1873), 42 L. J. (Q. B.) 

47 . . 265 
Morant r. Chamberlin (1861), 6 ll! 

4 N. 541 . . 1224 
Morby, R. *. (1881), 8 Q. B. D. 571 804« 
Morfit, R. r. (1826), R. 4 R. 307 . . 442 
Morgan r. Brydges (1818), 2 Stark. 

(N. P.) 314 . . 

— r. Edwards (1815), 6 Tannt. 

394. • 

— R. r. (1610), 1 Bulstr. 84 \ \ 

(1745), 2 Str. 1214 . . 

(1764), 1 Leach, 54.. 

(1780), 1 Doug. 814 . . 

(1831), I M. 4 Rob. 

134» . . 388n 

(1844), 1 Cox, 109 . . 

(1852), 6 Cox, 107 . . 

Morgan, Re (1852), 6 Cox, 116 . . 

— R. r. (1854), Dears. 395 . • 

(1875), 14 Cox, 337.. 

(1895), 59 J. P. 827.. 

Morley, R. r. (1827), 1 Y. 4 J. 221 

— (Lord), R. v. (1666), 6 St. 

Tr. 769 . . 871, 789, 794 
Morpoev, B. r. (1814), 2 M. 4 Sel. 

602.. 123 



419 

299 
220 
190 
389 
149 



1075 
1060 
207 
453 
323 
386 
73 



TAGR 

Morris r. Miller (1767), 4 Burr. 2057 33, 

1170 

— R. r. (1761), 2 Burr. 1189 . . 363 

(1814), R. 4 R. 270 31, 

720 

(1820), 1 St. Tr. (N. S.) 

1021 . . 1007 

(1830), 1 B. A Ad. 441 1185, 

1219 

(1839), 9 C. 4 P. 89 . . 496 

(1840), 9 C. 4 P. 349 . . 76, 

440 

(1851), 5 Cox, 205 . . 1247 

(1867), L.R.1C.C.R. 

90 . . 177, 780 

(1867), 10 Cox, 480 . . 171 

Morrison r. Kelly (1762), 1 W. Bl. 

885 . . 228 
— R. v. (1859), Bell, 158 .' * 502, 

788 
Morse, R. r. (1904), W. N. 114 . . 1210, 

1213, 1220», 1222 
Mortimer r. M'Callan (1840). 6 M. 

AW. 58.. 357 
Mortlock, R. r. (1847), 7 Q. B. 459 5 
Morton, R. r. (1795), 2 East, P. C. 

955 . . 730 

(1843), 2 M. 4 Rob. 

514.. 335 

(1873), L. R. 2 C. C. 

R. 22 . . 727 
Moseley, R. v. (1861), L. 4 C. 92 '. '. 610 
Moses,'R. r. (1836), 7 C. 4 P. 416, 

423,480.. 717 
Mosey, R. r. (1784), 1 Leach, S66n 836 
Moslev, R. r. (1$25), 1 Mood. 97 . . 321, 

779 

(1835), 3 A. 4 E. 488 1250, 

1251 
Moss, R. r. (1856), Dears. 4 B. 104 617 

— r. Hancock (1899), 2Q.B. Ill 268, 

269 
Most, R. r. (1881), 7 Q. B. D. 244 . . 814, 

1128 
Mothersell, R. v. (1718), 1 Str. 98 . • 857 
Molt, R. v. (1827), 2 C. 4 P. 621 . . 1280 
Mount, R. r. (1875), L. R. 6 P. C. 

288.. 234 
Mountford, R. p. (1885), 7 C. 4 P. 

242 . • 823 
Moxon, R. r. (1841), 4 St. Tr. (n! 

S.) 693 . . 1022 
Moyle and Brennan, R. t>. (1898), 

Cent. Crim. Court. . 1079 
Mucklow, R. o. (1827), 1 Mood. 160 504, 

514 
Modie, R. r. (1831), 1 M. 4 Rob. 128 1043 
Mulcahy v. R. (1868), L. R. 8 H. L. 
306 . . 94, 166, 168, 198, 202, 204, 946, 

960, 1277, 1278, 1288 
Mnllany, R. v. (1865), L. 4 C. 593 1060 
Muller, R. r. (1864), 10 Cox, 48 . . 422 
Mnllett r. Hunt (1833), 1 Cr. 4 M. 

752.. 413 
Mulligan r. Cole (1875), L. R. 10 

Q. B. 649 . . 994 



icviii 



Table of Cases. 



PAGE 

Mullin?, R. r. (1848), 3 Cox, 626 . . 813, 

390, 419, 951 
Mulreaty, R. r. (1812), 3 Rasa. Cr. 

(6th ed.) 250.. 924, 925 
Mundnr, R. r. (1799), 2 Leach, 850 492 
Mun<>7., R. r. (1740), 2 Str. 1127 . . 73 
Munroc, R. r. (1820), 1 St. Tr. 

(X. S.)1356.. 943 

Munslow, R. r. (1895), 1 Q. B. 758 85, 

1118, 1123, 1127, 1131, 1132 

Manapn, R. r. (1847), 2 Cox, 186 . . 654 

Munton, R. r. (1793), 1 Esp. 62 . . 1015 

(1829), 8 C. 4 P. 498 1060 

Mnrdock, R. r. (1851), 2 Den. 298 559, 

572 
More r. Have (1811), 4 Taunt. 484 894 
Murphy, R. r. (1753), 2 East, P. C. 

949 . . 725 

(1833), 6C.4P. 103 15, 

789, 790 

(1837), 8 C. A P. 297 92, 

344, 414, 1288 

(1853), 6 Cor, 840.. 642 

(1869), L. R. 2 P. C. 

535.. 291, 295 

(1876), 13 Cox, 298 

(/r.).. 606 
Murray r. Benboir (1838), 4 St. Tr. 

(N. S.) 1409.. 1023 

— r. R. (1845), 7 Q. B. 700.. 286, 

1169 

— R. r. (1750), 2 East, P. C. 

496.. 626 

(1784), 1 Leach, 344 461 

(1830), 6 C. A P. 145 466, 

568, 571 

(1852), 6 Cox, 509 (/r.) 801 

(1858), 1 F..A F. 80. . 1049 

Murrow, R. r. (1835), 1 Mood. 456 815 
Murton, R. r. (1862), 8 F. A F. 492 824, 

781 

Muscot, R. r. (1713), 10 Mod. 192 . . 409 
Musgrave t. Medex (1816), 19 Yes. 

652.. 1045 

Mutters, R. r. (1804), L. AC. 491 . . 1186 

(1894), L. A C. 51 1 . . 459 

Mycock, R. r. (1871), 12 Cox, 28 . . 900, 

901 
Myott, R. r. (1853), 6 Cox, 406 . . 757 



NAPPER, R. r. (1824), 1 Mood. 44 68, 

631 
Nappcr Tandy, R. r. (1800), 27 St. 

Tr 1191 938 
Nash, R. r. (1819), R. A R.886 .' ! 1249 

(1852), 2 Den. 498 .. 718 

(1903) (unreported) .. 908 

Nash, r. R. (1864), 4 B. A S. 985 . . 79, 

88,85,282, 1141 
Nasillski, R. r. (1897), 61 J. P. 520 1172 
Nathan r. Woolf (189y), 15 T. L. R. 

250.. 854, 1172,1176 
Nattras*, R. r. (1882), 15 Cox, 73 . . 658 



paob 
Naylor, R. r. (1865). L. R. 1 C. C. fc. 

4.. 610 

(1868), 11 Cox, 18 . . 1049 

Neal, R. r. (1835), 7 C. 4 P. 168 . . 891 
Neale, R. r. (1839), 9 C. A P. 431 . . 1099 

(1844), 1 Den. 3S 917, 1289 

Neat, R. r.(1900), 69 L. J.(Q. R) 118 444, 

5G4 
Neeld r. Hendon U. D. C. (1899), 

81 L. T. 405 .. 1217, 1225 
Xe^us, R. r. (1878), L. R. 2 C. C. R. 

84.. 561, 667 
Neil, R. r. (1826), 2 C. A P. 485 . . 1184 
Neill Cream, R. r. (1891). 116 Cent. 

(rim. Ct. Sess. Pap. 1451 . . 309 
Nelson p. Whittall (1817), 1 B. * 

Aid. 19 . . 881 
— r. R. (1902), App. Cas. 250 588 
Nether Hallam, R. r. (1854), 6 Cox, 

435.. 1255 
Nethexseal, R. r. (1791), 4 T. R. 258 36 "> 
Netherthong, R. r. (1818), 2 B. A 

Aid. 179 . . 1225, 1232 
Nettleton. R. r. (1830), 1 Mood. 259 563 
Neville, R. r. (1792), Peake (3rd 

ed.), 91.. 1134 

(1852), 6 Cox, 69 . . 297, 

106O 
Newall, R. p. (1852), 6 Cox, 21 . . 106O. 

1067 
Newbold. R. r. (1869). 11 Cox, 231 1223 
Newboult, R. v. (1872), L. R. 1 C.C. 

R. 844 . . 647, 651, 654, 6."V7 
Newcastle-upon-Tyne (JJ.), R. r. 

(1881). 1 B. A Ad. 938. . I IBS 
Newhouse, R. r. (1853), 22 L. J. (Q. 

B.) 127.. 1134 
Newill, R. r. (1836), 1 Mood. 458 . . 660, 

602 
Newland. See Knewland, 
Newman. R. r. (1852), 2 Den. 390 . . 18G, 

359,860, 1050, 1063, 
1063 

(1858), Dears. 85 . . 897 

(1858), 1 E.&B.268 996, 

1126, 1133 

(1882), 8 Q. B. D. 

706 . . 576, 680n 
New Saram, R. r. (1845). 7 Q. B. 

941 . . 1236 
New South Wales (Bank) p. Piper 

(1897), App. Cas. 383 . . 35 
New Windsor (Mayor, etc.) p. Clay- 
ton (1899), App. Css. 41 .. 688, 

1236 
Newton r. llarUnd (1810), 1 Scott 

(N. R.), 474 .. 1111 

— R. r. (1784), 1 Sir. 413 . . 147 

(1838), 2 Mood. 69 . . 735 

(1843), 2 M. A Rob. 

503.. 103, 1173 

(1844), 1 C. A K. 469 62, 

182, 844, 1066 

(1845), 1 Cox, 195 . . 138 

(1849), 13 Q. B. 716 222, 

223 



Table of Cases. 



XCJX 



PAGE 

Xwtoo, R. r. (1*52), 4 Cox, 262 . . 4*24 

(1*59), I F. 4 F. Gil 323, 

(IS92), 1 Q. B. C48 . . 1 196, 

1196 

(1903), 67 J. P. Rep. 

463 ■ • 150 
Kintao. Ex parte (1855). 4 E. «r B. 

869 ; 16 C. B. 97 . . 280, 282 
Xihba. R. r. (1824), 1 Mood. 25 . . 76, 

43d 
Xiebol, R. r. (1W7), R. & R, 130 . . 834 
Nicholas, R. r. (1845), 1 Cox. 218 638 

(1846),2C.&K.246 124, 

318 388 
Xiefcol), R. f. (1830), 1 B. * Ad. 21 1048, 

1055,1056 
KichoUs. R. r. (1840), 9 C. k P. 267 840 

- (1868), 1 F. 4 F. 51 552, 

553 

(1867), 10 Cox, 476 916, 

917 

(1874), 18 Cox, 75 . . 784 

(1904), 68 J. P. Rep. 

452 . . 67, 90 
Sicholli r. Parker (1805), 14 Fast, 

33U..291, 318 
Nichols, R. r. (1742), 13 East, 412* 131, 

132, 1285, 1286 

(1900), 64 J. P. 217 108 

i 7 R. r. (1794), 2 Leach, 610 448 

(1840), 8 Doirl. 422 198 
(1840), 8Dowl.489 190 
(1899), 2 Q. B. 455 147 
(1899), Cent. Crim. 

Court . . 1089 

(1901), 65 J. P. 298 1114 

R. p. (1839), 8 a * P. 757 1249 

R. v. (1852), 6 Cox, 120 . . 822 

R. r. (1852), 6 Cox, 320 . . 720, 

730 

R. r. (1719), 1 Str. 185 . . 152 

(1866), 4 F. k F. 1040* 825 



», R. v. (1848), 2 C. k K. 620 560 
R. r. (1832), 5 C. A P. 326 891, 

1018 

(1866), 4 F. k F. 920 788, 

800 
Xe*U r. Well* (1668), 1 Sid. 359 . . 865 
i, R. r. ( 1862), 6 Cox, 137 . . 780, 792 
R. r. (1876), Ir. Rep. 10 

C. L. 505.. 1114 
i's Case (inetrt .), Fort. 129 . . 524 
Xonftenfelt r. Maxim-Xordenfelt Co. 

(1894), App. Caa. 535 . . 1281 
Xoraiap, R. r. (1812), C. k Mar. 

501 . . 572 
Kesrw. R. r. (1840), 9 C. k P. 241 679 

(1758), 2 Ld. K«nyon, 

300.. 1287 

Sofia, R. r. (1795), 2 East, P. C. 

1021.. 653 

Xetttssiptoii, R. r. (1814), 2 II. 4 

*^ Bel. 262 . . 1236 



Xsftn CoMogham. R. r. (1823), I 



627 



A.CLP. 



TAGS 

North Eastern Rail. Co. r. Dalton 

Overseen (1900), App. Can. 345 1230 
North Eastern Rail. Co., R. r. (1901), 

19 Cox, 682 . . 226, 292 
Noith Petherton, R. r. (1826), 5 B. 

k C. 508 . 358 
Norton, R. r. (1823), R. A K. 510 ! ! 56, 

300 

(1838), 8 C. it P. 196 70, 

594 

(1838), 8 C. k P. 671 625 

(1886), 16 Cox. 69 . . 69, 

120, 1263 
Norwich, R. r. (1719), 1 8tr. 177. . 1225 

- (Mavor, etc. J v. Norfolk 
Rail. Co. (1865), 4 E. k B. 897, 

440.. 1219 
Nott, R. r. (1843), 4 9. B. 768 . . 1077 
Nottingham Corporation, He (1897), 

2Q. B. 502.. 119 
— JJ., R. r. (1756), Say. 

216 . . 147 
Nottinghamshire C. C. r. Manchester, 
etc., Kail. Co. (1894), 71 L. T. 

430.. 1238 
Nutbrown, R. r. (1750), Fort. 76 . . 626 
Note, R. p.. 1 Burn's Just. (30th 

ed.)978.. 835 
Nutt, R. r. (1728), 1 Barnard. (K. B.) 

307 . . 290 



OAKHAMPTON (Mvrnr, etc.), R. 

r. (1752), lWila. 382.. 402 
Oakley, R. v. (1832), 4 B. k Ad. 807 1109, 

1113 
Oastler, R. v. (1874), L. R. 9 Q. B. 

132 137 
Osies (Titos), R. r. (1685), 10 St. Tr. 

1073.. 847 
— R. v. (1827), 1 Mood. 176, cit. 258 

(1855), Dean. 459 . . 600 

O'Briau, R. v. (1789), 2 Str. 1143 . . 1071 
O'Brien (Bronterre), R. v. (1840), 4 

St. Tr. (N. S.) 1391 . . 990 
O'Brien, R. v. (1824), Smith k Batty 

(Ir. K. B.)79.. 1115 

(1884), Cooke k Alcock 

(Ir. K. B.) 128 . . 146 

(1846), 1 Cox, 185 .. H88 

(I860), 4 Cox, 400.. 633 

(1882), 15 Cox, 29 . . 170 

O'Brien Dalton, Ex parte (1890), 28 

L. R. Ir. 36 . . 186 

— (Smith), R. v. (1848), 6 St. 

Tr. (N. S.) 671.. 990, 998 

— (Smith) v. R. (1849), 7 St. 

Tr. (N. S.) 1, 349 . . 200, 201, 
208, 225, 281, 402, 929, 943 

— ( William), Ex parte (1888), 

15 Cox, 180.. 991, 997 
— r. R. (1890), 26 L. R. Ir. 

451, 623.. 213, 279n, 286 
O'Callaghan, R. v. (1880), 14 Cox, 

499.. G8. 165 

h 



Table of Cases. 



l'ACE I 

O'Coiglev, R. r. (171)8), 26 St. Tr. j 

1191 1231 . • 204 ' 
Ockley, R. r. (1623), Palmer, 294 ! ! 1050 
O'Connell, R. r. (1831), 2 St. Tr. 

(X.S.)629.. 1098. 1278 

(1843), 1 Cox, 305, 

410 . • 222 
O'Connell r. R. (1844). 5 St. Tr! 

(N. S.) 1..88, 91. 92, 
93, 99, 100, 163, 182, 
201, 203,215.223,231, 
281,286,386.941.1098. 
1277, 1286 
O'Connor (Feargius), R. r. (1839), 4 

St. Tr. (X. S.) 1299.. 1128 
— R. r. (1840), 4 St. Tr. (X.S.) 

1352 . . 990 

(1843), 4 St. Tr. (N.S.) 

985.. 36, 891,402,998 

(I872),7St.Tr.(N.S.) 

3/I..239, 952 

(1881), 15 Cox, 3 . . C18 

Oddy, R. r. (1851). 2 Den. 264 . . 552 
Odgcro, R. r. (1843), 2 M. A Rob. 

479.. 161 
O'Doherly, R. r. (1848), 6 St. Tr. 

(N. S.) 831.. 201, 951 
O'Donnell, R. r. (1848), 7 St. Tr. 

637 . . SS, 990, 1278. 
1289 

(1857), 7 Cox, 337 394 , 

O'Donoghue r. Moon ( 1904), 68 J. P. 

Rep. 349 . . 855 : 
Offord, R. r. (1831), 5 C. A P. 168 25 ' 
Ogden, R. r. (1834), 6 C. A P. 631 763 ! 
Ogilvie, R. r. (1825), 2 C. A P. 

230.. 301m ' 
O'Gorman r. Sweet (1890), 54 J. P. | 

663.. 689 ; 
O'Kecfe, R. r. (1893), 15 N. S. W. 

Rep. (Law) 1 . . 276 
O'Kelly v. Harvey (1881-2), 15 Cox, 

435 (/r.) . . 1099 
Oldfield, R. r. (1811). 2 Rum. Cr. 

(6th ed.) 650 . . 302 
Oldham, R. r. (1852), 2 Den. 472 . . 637 
Oldroyd, R. v. (1805), R. A R. 88 . . 878, 

418 
Olifler, R. v. (1866), 10 Cox, 402 . . 900, 

901, 903 
Oliphant, R. t>. (1905), 21 T. L. R. 416 
Olive v. Guin (1658), 2 Sid. 145 . . 345 
Oliver, R. r. (1811), 2 Leach, 1072 450 

(I860), Bell, 287 . . 216, 838 

(1877), 13 Cox, 588 . . 1142 

Ollis, R. r. (1900), 2 Q. B. 758 . . 171, 312, 

615 
Omant, R. r. (1854), 6 Cox, 466 . . 370 
O'Mealy r. Newell (1807), 8 East, 

364 . . 1045, 1071 
Omichund r. Barker (1744), 1 Willes, 

538 . . 389 
Oneby, R. r. (1726), 17 St. Tr. 

29 . . 789 
O'Neil r. Kruger (1863), 4 B. A s! 

389. . 1158 



I* AUK 

O'Xeil r. Longman (1863), 4 B. A S. 

376.. 1158 
— R. r. (1871), Ir. Rep. G CI* 

1 . . 299, 1107 

— r. R. (1854), 6 Cox. 495 .. 225 
Ooley r. Gee (1861). 30 L. J. (II. C) 

222.. 1200 
Opic, R. r. (1669), 1 Wms. Saund. 

300* . . 146 

(1860), 8 Cox, 332 . . 826 

Orbell, R. r. (1704), 6 Mod. 42 . . 121 
Onslow's Case (1874), L. R. 9 Q. B. 

219.. 1078, 1095 
Orchard, R. r. (1848). 3 Cox, 248 . . 1188 
Orgill, R. r. (1839), 9 C. A P. 80 . . 1171, 

1176 
Original Hartlepool Collieries Co. r. 

Gibb (1877). 5 Cb. D. 713. . 1216 
Orman, R. r. (1880), 14 Cox, 381 . . 1279 
Orrell, R. r. (1835), 7 C. A P. 774 . . 208 
Orton (alia* Castro), R. r. (1878), 

M. S. . . 186 
- - R. r. (1874), L. R. 9 Q. B. 

850, 356.. 213, 214 

(1878), 14 Cox, 226 . . 791, 

1099 
Osbaldiston r. Simpson (1843), 13 

Sim. 518 . . 1089* 
Osborn r. Gillett (1878), L. R. 8 Ex. 

88.. 261 

— r. London Docks Co. (1866), 

10 Ex. 698 . . S99 

— r. Veitch (1858), 1 F. A F. 

317 . . 834 

— R. r. (1732), 2 Barnard. 

(K. B.) 138, 166.. 1128 

(1765), 2 Burr. 1697 5 

Osborne r. Gough (1803), 3 B. A P. 

551.. Ill 
R. r. (1837), 7 CAP. 799 12* 

(1837), 8 CAP. 113 H7> 

(1842), C A Mar. 622 319 

(1905), IK. B. 561 911, 

917 919 
Osman, R. r. (1881), 15 Cox, 1 . . ' 822 
Osmer, R. r. (1804), 5 East, 304 . . 70 
O'Shay, R. r. (1898), 19 Cox, 76 . . 834, 

910 
Oswestry, R. r. (1817), 6 M. A Sel. 

861.. 1235 

- (Treasurer) R. v. (1848), 

12 Q. B. 239.. 257 

Otto, Ex parte (1894), 1 Q. B. 420 207 
Over r. Harwood (1900), 1 Q. B. 

803 303 
Overton, R. r. (1842), C. A Mar! 

655.. 1048 

(1848),4Q.B.83 280, 

1055 

(1851). Dears. 808 712 

Overton, Ex parte (1815), 2 Rose, 

257.. 1071 

Owen, R. r. (1792), 2 Leacb, 672 . . C43 

(1825), 1 Mood. 96 . . 12 

(1826). 1 Mood. 118 . . 299, 

866, 1247 



Table of Cam. 



ei 



PAGE 

Owen, IL r. ( 1830), 4 C A P. 236 . . 22 

(1839), 9 C. 4 P. 83 . . 1 15, 

123, 124, 327, 391, 
394 

(1840), 9 C. A P. 238 . . 327 

(1888), 30 Q.B.I). 8*29 920 

Oral, R. r. (1828), 1 Mood. 205 . . 094 
Oxenham, R. r. (1877), 46 L. J. 

(M. C.) 125 . . 459 
Oxford, R. r. (1819), R. 4b R. 382 . . 305 

- (Mayor, etc.), R. r. (1834), 

3 Nev. A M. 877 . . 295 

(1840), 4 St. Tr. (N.S.) 

497 . . 23, 25, 27, 819 
Oxfordshire, R. r. (1811), 13 East, 

411.. 132, 291, 293, 

295 

(1812), 16 East, 

223 . . 1235 

(1825), 4 B. AC 

194.. 1235 

(1830), IB. A Ad. 

289 .. 686, 1236 

(1830), IB. A Ad. 

297» . . 686, 1235 
Oxler, R. r. (1852). 3 C. A K. 317 280, 

1057 



PACKARD, R. r. (1842), C. A Mar. 

236 . . 787, 804 
Packer, R. r. (1714), 2 East, P. C. 

653.. 

(1886), 16 Cox, 57 . . 

Paddle, R. p. (1822), R. A R. 484 . . 



59 

903 

532, 

1116 



Paddock r. Forrester (1840), 1 Mao. 

A U. 583 . . 144 
Pace r. Faucet (1687), Cro. Elhs. 

227 . . 298 

- r. Mann (1827), M. A M. 79 ! ! 382 

— R.r. (1588), 5 Co. Rep. 54.. 363 

(1832), 1 Dowl. 507 . . 190 

(1837), 8 CAP. 122 .. 975 

(1W1), 9 C. A P. 756 . . 302 

Pajret, R. r. (1900), 64 J. P. 281 . . 396 
Paice, R. r. (1843), 1 C. A K. 73 . . 656 
Paine, R. r. (1696), 1 Ld. Raym. 729 315. 

372 

(1834), 7 C. A P. 136 . . 248, 

( And see Payee.) 633 

Pane's Case (1608), Yelv. HI . . 1015 
Palgiave r. Windham (1718), 1 Str. 

214.. 80 
Palmer, R. r. (1680), 7 St. Tr. 1067 407, 

941 

(1761), 2 Burr. 1162.. 147 

(1778), 1 Leach, 102 80 

(1804). 1 B. A P. (N. 

R.) 96 . . 12, 720, 724 

(1831), 1 M. A Rob. 70 1249 

(1884), 6 C. A P. 652 123 

(1856), 5 E. A B. 1024 131, 

136 138 
Pamenter, R. r. (1872), 12 Cox, 177 ' 334 



rAOK 

Panse, R. r. (1897), 61 J. P. 536 . . 433 
Pantalcon daSa's Case (1654), 5 St. 

Tr. 461 . . 21 
Pappineau, R. r. (1726), 2 Str. 636 1184 
Paradise, R. r. (1766), 2 East, P. C. 

565.. 461 
Parapano r. Ilappaz (1894), App. 

Cas. 165.. 1176 
Pardenton, R. p. (1853), 6 Cox, 247 688, 

855 
Pardoe, R. r. (1894), 17 Cox, 715 . . 656 
Parish, R. r. (1H37), 7 C. A P. 782 . . 124 

(1837), 8 C. A P. 94 . . 715 

Park r. Mem (1800), 2 B. A P. 

217 . 880 
Parke, R. r. (1843), 1 Cox, 4 . . '. ". 714 

( 1903), 2 K. B. 432 . . 2, 125, 

146, 220, 230, 293, 865, 

996, 997, 1095, 1133, 1134 

Parker r. Alder (1899), 1 Q. B. 20 35 

— r. Hoskins (1810), 2 Taunt. 

223.. 381 

— r. M- William (1830), 6 Bing. 

683.. 414 

— R. r. (1812), Coll. Lun. 477 25 

(1887), 7 CAP. 825.. 605 

■ (1839), 9 C A P. 45 . . 652 

(1842), C A Mar. 639 409, 

1061 

(1842), 3 Q. B. 92 . . 1285 

(1847), 2 Cox, 274 . . 740 

(1861), L. A C 42 . . 333 

(1862) (unreported) .. 370 

(1864), L. AC 459 .. 97 

(1870), L. R. ICC R. 

225 . . 72, 73, 305, 872, 1075 

(1895), 59 J. P. 793 802,855 

Parkes, R. c. (1794), 2 Leach, 614 448 

(1796), 2 Leach, 775 713 

Parkin r. Moon (1836), 7 C A P. 

408. . 420 

— It. r . (1824), 1 Mood. 45 .' .' 48, 

222 434 
Parkins r. llawksbaw (1817), 2 Stark. 

(N. P.) 239.. 401, 402 

- - R. ». (1824), 1 0. A P. 548 209 
Parkinson R. r. (1851), 2 Den. 459 293 

- Re (1897), 56 L. T. 715 . . 260, 

1090n 
Parkyns, R. p. (1696), 13 St. Tr. 0$ 306, 

939 

( 1820), 3 B. A Aid. 668 148 

Parlement Beige, The (1880), 5 

P. D. 197.. 41 
Pannitcr p. Coupland (1840), 6 M. 

AW. 105.. 1028, 1132 
Parnell, R. r. (1881), 14 Cox, 505 . . 148, 

197, 1278 
Parr, R. r. (1841), 2 M. A Rob. 346 87, 

551 

(1862), 2 F. A F. 861 . . 213 

Parratt, R. v. (1881), 4 C A P. 570 331 
Parry, R. r. (1887), 7 C. A P. 836 . . 173, 

199, 200, 860 
Pauon?, R. r. (1763). 1 W. Bl. 892, 

401 . . 1288 



cii 



Table of Case*. 



PAGE 

Parsons, R. r. (1866), L, R. 1 C. C. R. 

24 . . 1042 

(1888), 16 Cox, 498 . . 468, 

565, 575 

(1904) (unreported) 576, 

887 
Partridge. R. r. (1886), 7 C * P. 

551.. 831, 341 

- r. Strange (1552), Plowd. 

75 . . 56 
Pascoe, R. r. (1849), 1 Den. 456 . . 1094 
Passer, R. r. (1836), 7 C. A P. 282 IS, 

1249 
Passman, R. r. (1834), 1 A. 4 E. 

608. .132, 137 
Patch. R.r. (1782), 1 Leach, 238.. 451 
Pate, R. r. (1850), 8 St. Tr. (N. S.) 1 952 
Pateman, R. r. (1788), 2 T. R. 777 1251n 

(1821), R. A R. 455 730 

Patent Eurika Co., R. r. (1865), 13 

L. T. 865 . . 138 

Patey, R. r. (1705), 14 St Tr. 862 . . 282 

Patience, R.r. (1837), 7 C. 4 P. 775 810 
Patram, R. r. (1787), 3 East, P. C 

782 . . 390 

Patrick, R. r. (1783), 1 Leach, 253 66 

Patv, R. r. (1770), 2 W. Bl. 721 . . 693 

Paul, R. r. (1840), 2 M. A Rob. 307 1222, 

1224, 1234 

- — - (1890), 25 Q. B. D. 202 916 

Pawlyn, R. r. (1666), 1 Sid. 208 . . 6 

Pa^ ne r. Bennett (1904), Prob. 138 863 

- r. Wilson (1896), 2Q.B. 537 268, 

269 
— R. r. (1789), 13 East. 160, 

clt. . . 297 

(1881), 4 C. A P. 658 841 

- (1838), I Mood. 378 . . 809, 

867 

(1866),L.R.1C.C.R. 

27.. 1036 

(1872), L.R. ICC. R. 

849.-893,394, 419 
Peace, R. r. (1820), 3 B. A Aid. 579 67 
Peach, R. r. (1758), 1 Burr. 648 . . 149 
Peacock, R. r. (1814), R. AR.278 . . 713 

(1870), 12 Cox, 21.. 103, 

372, 874 
Pear, R. r. (1779), 1 Lench, 212 . . 454, 614 
Poarce. R. r. (1791), 1 Peake, 106 

(3rd ed.).. 808, 312, 993 

(1794), 2 Etst, P. C. 

COS, 673.. 454, 518 

(1810), R. A R. 174.. 80 

(1840), 9 CAP. 667.. 898 

(1863), 8 B. AS. 581.. 1045 

Pearce r. Whale (1826). 5 B. k C. 88 1 131 
Pearkt, Gunston k Tee, Ltd. r. Ward 

(1902), 2K.B. 1 11 
Pearson t*. Lemaitrc (1843), 5 Man. 

AG. 700.. 1131 

— R. r. (1886), 2 Lewin, 144 29 

(1835), 2 Lewin, 216 798 

(1837), 7 C A P. 761 376 

(1887), 8 C. A P. 119 1064 

Pease, R. w. (1832), 4 B. A Ad. 30 1185 



PAC« 

Peat, R. r. (1781), 1 Leach, 228 . . 528 

(1888), 2 Lewin, 111.288 398, 

1169 
Pechcll r. Watson (1841), 8 BL A 

W. 691 . . 1079 
Peck r. R. (1889), 9 A. A E. 686 . . 1284 
Peddell r. Rutter (1887), 8 C A P. 

837, 340 . . 1057 
Pedgrift r. Chevallier (1860). 8 C. 11. 

(K. S.) 246 . . 356 
Pedler r. Paige (1888). 1 M. A Rob. 

258 . . 382 
Pedlev, R. r. (1772), 1 Leach. 325 ! ! 1050 
Pedlv, R.r. (1834). 1 A. A E. 822.. 1216 
Peel," R. r. (1860), 2 F. A F. 21 . . 322, 

422 

(1 862), L. A C 231 . . 43 

Peel r. Jems (1885), 49 J. P. 264 . . 267 
Peirson, R. r. (1705), 2 Ld. Raym. 

1197 . • 1197 
Pelham, R. r. (1846), 8 Q. B. 959 .' ! 2, 

785, 874 
Pellew r. East Wonford (1829), 9 

B. A C. 134 . . 97 
Pellow, Re (1824), M'Cl. Ill . . 117 
Peltier, R. r. (1803), 28 St. Tr. 529 143, 

991,994, 1128, 1193 
Pembliton, R. r. (1874), L. R. 2 

CC R. 119.. 661, 701 
Pembridge, R.r. (1841). 3Q.B. 901 197. 

1234 

(1841), C. A Mar. 

167 .. 858, 882 
Pcndcrryn, R. r. (1788), 2 T. R. 

513.. 1225 
Penfold, R. r. (1902), 1 K. B. 647 . . 1816 
Pennegoes, Machynlleth and, R. r. 

(1822-3), IB. AC. 142.. 131 
Pennegoes, Machynlleth and, R. r. 

(1822-3), 2 B. A C 166 . . 1287 
Penny r. Hanson (1886), 18 Q. B. D. 

478 . . 601 
~ R. r. (1697), 1 Ld. Raym. 163 280 

(1855), Chester Assizes 676 

Penprate, R. r. (1888). 4 B. A Ad. 

673.. 131, 182, 138 
Penson, R. r. (1882), 5 C A P. 

412.. 1178 
Pepys, R. r. (1792), Peake, 187 (8rd 

ed.) . . 1050 
Perkes, R. r. (1824), I C A P. 800 632 
Perkins, R. r. (1831), 4 C A P. 637 15, 

790, 1099 

(1840), 9 C A P. 895 821, 

822 
(1845), 7 Q. B. 165.. 159 

(1861); 2 Deo. 459 . . 277, 

551 
Perrott, R. r. (1814), 2 M. A Sel. 

879 . . 596, 1056 
Perrv r. Gibson (1884), 1 A. A E. 

48 . 408 
— R. r. (1660), 14 St. Tr. 1312 781 

(1798), 5 T. R. 458 . . 198 

(1794), 3 Rubs. Cr. (6th 

ed.) 666 . . 898, 898 



Tabl4 of Cates. 



cm 



PACt 

Pern, Rr.(l845), 1 Den. 69. . 500, 501 
- — (1855), Deaw. 471 .. 825 
Pertreu r. Toadeir (1799), 1 Hagg. 

Consist. Kep. 136 . . 1 174 
Pctch, R. r. (1878), 14 Cox, 116 . . 438. 

469, 477 
Petcherine, IL r. (1855), 7 Cos, 79 1021, 

1022 

Peters, R. r. (1756), 1 Burr. 568 . . 295 

• (1643), 1 C. ft K. 246 445 

(1866), 16 Q. B. D. 

636.. 1147, 1148, 1149 
Petricua, R. r. (1906), 67 J. P. Kep. 

378 . . 1065 
Peine, R. r. (1784), 1 Leach, 294 . . 643 

(1655), 4 K. ft B. 737 1223 

Pettit, R. r. (1850). 4 Cox, 164 . . 326 
Petr, R. r. (1630), Cro. Car. 183 . . 811 
Pewtress, R. r. (1735), 2 Sir. 1026 83, 93 
Pharmaceutical Society r. London, 

etc., SappW Association (1883), 

8 App. Cm. 857 . . 11 
Phelan, R. r. (1881), 14 Cox, 579 

(/r.) . . 138 

Phelps, R. c. (1757), 2 Ld. Ken. 570 148 

(1841), C. A Mar. 180 166, 

805, 807, 864, 1299 
Philip, R. r. (1858), 1 F. ft F. 105 100, 

186 
Philippe, R. c (1764), 3 Burr. 1564 143 

(1805), 6 East, 464 78, 

303, 1115 
Philip., R. r. (1719), 1 Sir. 261 . . 81 

( 1731), 2 Str. 921 . . 86. 120, 

1058 

(1839), 8 C. ft P. 736 22, 

908 
Phillips r. £ uner ( 1795), 1 Esp. 355 419 

— r. Evre (1869), L. R. 4 Q. 

B. 225.. 891 

— R.<% (1736), Cas. (K. B.) 

temp. Hardw. 241 146 

(1767), 4 Burr. 2089 143 

(1778), 2 Cowp. 83) 812 

(1801), 2 East, P. C. 

662,663.. 441 

(1811), 3 Camp. 73 . . 827, 

828 

( 1817), R. ft R. 869 . . 97, 

305 

(1842), 2 Mood. 252 671, 

677, 1102 

- — (1868), 11 Cox, 142 213, 

224 

(1900), 65 J. P. 41 . . 1162 

PhHp, R. r. (1830), 1 Mood. 263 . . 660 
Phtllpot, R. r. (1853), Dean. 179. .2, 784 
Phillpotts, R. ». (1851), 2 Den. 302 1050 
Fhilpotta, R. r. (1843), 1 a ft K. 

112. .120, 605 
Phipoe, R. r. (1795), 2 East, P. C. 

599. .501, 522, 526, 531 
Pickering r. Noyes (1823), 1 B. ft C. 

262.. 412 
Picket, K. r. (1765), 2 East, P. C. 

501.. 629 



TACK 

Pickford, R. p. (1830), 4 C. ft P. 

227.. 52-2 

Picton's Case (1804), 30 St Tr. 225 38, 

125 

Pierce, R. r. (1852), 6 Cox, 117 . . 445 

(1858), Bell, 235 .. 270 

(1886), 26 L. J. (M. C.) 

85. .70, 120, 1149 
Piggot'tf Cuse ( 1 598), 5 Co. Rep. 29a 167 
Pigott, IL v. (1851), 1 Ir. C. L. Rep. 

471.. 1114 

(1808), II Cox, 44 {Ir.) 990, 

994 
Pigott, Re (1868), 11 Cox, 811 {Ir.) 282, 

283 
Pike, R. r. (1784), 1 Leach, 317 . . 619 

(1829), 8 C. ft P. 698 . . 821, 

822 

(1902), 1 K. B. 552. .329, 679, 

1147 
Pikcsler, R. p. (1839), 9 C. ft P. 121 337 
Piller, R. r. (1836), 7 C. ft P. 337. . 36 
Pilling, R. r. (1858), 1 F. ft F. 324 736 
Pirn e. CuroU (1840), 6 M. ft W. 

234. .818, 363 
Pinhorn, R. r. (1844), 1 Cox, 70 . . 783 
Pinney, R. r. (1831), 3 St Tr. (N. 

S.) It. .44, 143, 144,813, 
894 1101 
Pinter, Ra (1831), 17 Cox, 497 . .' 616 
Piper, R. r. (1900), 65 J. P. 10 . . 584 
Pippett, R. r. (1786), 1 T. R. 235. . 802 
Pitman, R. v. (1826), 2 C. ft P. 423 454 
Pitt, R. r. (1762), 3 Burr. 1335 . . 145, 

1254 

— r. Green (1808), 9 Eist, 188 . . 299 

Pittard r. Oliver (1891), 1 Q. B. 474 1182 

Pitton v. Walter (1718), 1 Str. 162 862 

Pitts, R. r. (1839), 8 C. ft P. 771 . . 67 

(1842), C. ft Mar. 284. . 785 

Pittwood, R. r. (1902), 19 T. L. R. 

37.. 803 
Platel, R. r. ( 1903), Cent. Crim. Ct. 2552 
PUtt, R. r. (1777), 1 Leach, 157. .110, 930 
PUtfcs, R. r. (1879), 28 W. R. 915. . 292, 

293 1218 
Plestow, R. r. (1808), 1 Camp. 494* 299, 

610 
Plumer, R r. (1814), R. ft R. 264.. 611, 

992 
Plnmmer, R. r. (1700), Kel. (J.) 109 14, 

219 

(1844), 1C. ft. K. 600 785 

( 1902), 2 K. B. 389 186, 

215, 276, 1277, 1285, 1286, 

1287, 1289 
PlunkeU r. Cobbett (1804), 5 Esp. 

136. .993, 1131 
Plympton, R. c (1724), 2 Ld. Raym. 

1877. .145, 1266 
Pocock e. Moore (1825), Ry. ft M. 

321.. 892 
— R. r. (1740), 2 Str. 1157 . . 1095, 

1097 

(1851), 17 Q. B. 84 . . 800 

Pollard, Re (1868), L. R. 2 P. C. 100 1095 



err 



Table of Cases. 



1\AGE 

Pollman, R. r. (1800), 2 Camp. 

229w..l081, 1278 
Polly, R. r. (1843), 1 C. & K. 77 . . 624 
Pomeroy v. Baddeley (1826), Ry. A 

M. 430. . 414 
Pond, R. r. (1718), Corny ns, 312 . . 140, 

1252n 
Ponsford A Newport Difltrirt School 

Board, Jfr (1894), 1 Oh. 464 . . 4 
Pook, R. t>. (1871), 10 Cox. 172n . . ai9 
Pool p. Bousfield (1807), 1 Camp. 

551. 1089» 
— r. Court (1812). 4 Taunt. 700 299 
Poole r. Huskisson (1843), 11 M. A 

W. 827. . 1228 

- Re. (1857), Dean. A B. 346 441 

— (Mayor, etc.), R. r. (1887), 19 

Q. B. D. 602, 683m . .86, 1210, 

1212, 1221, 1235 

Pooley, R. r. (1800), R. & R. 12 . . 502 

(1802), R. A R. 81 . . 613 

Poordage's Case (1670), 1 Mod. 22 1251m 
Pope, R. r. (1834), 6 C. A P. 346 . . 446 

(1867),3St.Tr.(y.S.) 

1089. . 1022 

(1902), 18 T. L. R. 717 210 

Popham r. Pickbum (1862), 7 H. A 

N. 891. . 997 
Porplewell, R. r. (1724), 2 Str. 686 75 
Porter r. Cooper (1834), 6 C. A P. 

354. . 1053 

— R. r. (1841), 9 C. A P. 778. . 809, 

863 
(1864), L. A C. 394 . . 874 

(1873), 12 Cox, 444. .805, 806 

Porter's Trusts (1856), 25 L. J. (Ch.) 

688. .879, 1170 
Portland (Countess) r. Prodgers 

(1683), 2 Vern. 104. . 234 
Portugal, R. r. (1885), 16 Q. B. D. 

487. .676, 689 
Post. R. r. (1806), R. A R. 101 . . 713 
Potter, R. ft. (1851), 2 Den. 235 . . 641 
Pi tts r. Cumbridge (1858), 8 E. A B. 

847. • 1047 
Pculterer's Case (1611), 9 Co. Rep! 

66. . 1281 
Poulton, R. r. (1832), 5 C. A P. 829 786 
Pountney, R. f». (1886), 7 C. A P. 

302 832 
Povey, R. r. (1862), Dears. 82. .1171, 1175 
Powell r. Blackett (1794), 1 Esp. 97 380 

— r. Fall (1880), 5 Q. B. D. 697 1185 

— r. Ford (1817), 2 Stark. 

(N. P.) 164. . 383 

— r. Hoyland (1851), 6 Ex. 70 456 
r. Kempton Park Racecourse 

Co. (1899), App. Cas. 143 1204 

— R. v. (1771), 1 Leach, 77. .74, 301 

(1775), 1 Leach, 100.. 888 

(1823), 1 CAP. 96.. 248 

(1831), 2 B. A Ad. 76 281 

(1852), 2 Den. 408. .280, 487, 

498 

(1884), 54 L. J. (M. C.) 

2fi.. 611 



Powle, R. r. (1618), >RolleRep. 52 
Powles, R. r. (1831), 4 C. A P. 571 
Powlter's Case (1614), 11 Co. Rep, 

29. . 
Powner, R. r. (1872), 12 Cox, 236 " 



PACK 

102 

815 

325 

766. 

757 

Poynder, R. r. (1823), 1 B. AC. 178 1261 
Povnton, R. r. (1862), L. A C. 247 464, 

512 
Pralt. R. r. (1880), 1 Mood. 263 . . 451 

- (1864), Dears. 360 . . 443 

(1855), 4 E. A B. 860. . 1249 

(1866), 4F.AF. 815.. 560 

Pratten, R. r. (1796), 6 T. R. 559. . 80 
Prebble, R. r. (1868), 1 F. A F. 325 809 
Precdy, R. i». (1888), 17 Cox, 433. . 1202 
Pressy, R. r. (1867), 10 Cox, 686 . . 909 
Preston (Lord), R. r. (1691), 12 St. 

Tr. 645. .44, 99, 989, 

940,946 

— R. r. (1889), 7 Dowl. 598. . 1235 

(1851), 2 Den. 363 .. 446 

Preston-on-tfae-hill, R. r. (1786), 2 

Str. 1040. . 290 
Prestridge, R. r. (1881), 72 L. T. 

Journ. 98. . 374 
Price. R. r. (1805), 6 East, 323. .227, 342 

- (1833), 5 C. A P. 610.. 670 

(1835), 7 C. A P. 178. . 809, 

867 

(1837), 8 C. A P. 19 .. 31 

(1838), 8 C. A P. 282 . . 807 

(1840), 11 A. A E. 727 3 

(1841), 9 CAP. 729.. 663 

(1868), 8 Cox, 96 .. 14 

(1881), Odgers on Libel 

(3rd ed.), 628. . 1121 

(1884), 12 Q. B. D. 247 2, 5, 

154, 1208 

(1900), 17 T. L. R. 80 82 

Price r. Scelcy (1848), 10 CI. A F. 

28.. 894 
— r. Torrington (Earl) (1708), 

1 Balk. 286. . 821 
Pries, R. r. (1863), 6 Cox, 165 . . 739 
Priestlev r. Hughes (1809), 11 East, 

1. .1171, 1176 

- R. t\ (1885), 49 J. P. 148 93 
Primelt, R. t». (1858), 1 F. A F. 60 901 
Prince r. Blackburn (1802), 2 East, 

250. . 381 
Prince's (The) Case (1605), 8 Co! 

Rep. 18a, 206. . 846 
Prince, R. r. (1868), 11 Cox. 145 . . 460 

(1868),L.R.1C.C. R. 

150. .448, 606 

(1875),L.R.2C.C.R. 

152. .84, 901 
Pringle, R. r. (1840), 9 C. A P. 408 727, 

761, 770 
Pritchard, R. r. (1836), 7 C. A P. 

808. .24, 183, 184 

* (1861), L. A C. 34 62, 

296 

(1901). 17T.L.R. 

810. .785, 786 



Table of Cases. 



cv 



PAOK 

Priretr, R. r. (1846), 1 Den. 193 . . 442 
Probert, R. r. (1800), 2 East, P. C. 

1090.. 652 

(1852), Dears. 80 .. 131 

Prosser, R. v. (1768), 2 East, P. C. 

506.. 630 
Protector r. Buckner (1655), Style, 

467 793 
Proud, R. p. (1861), L. * C. 97. .810, 563, 

574 
Proose's Case (1635), Cro. Car. 889 1251a 
Pwwse r. Spnnrav (1877), 46 L. J. 

Prob. 49. . 1 175 
Pnintev, R. p. (1887), 16 Cox, 844. . 368. 

916 
Pitod, R. r. (1690), 5 Hod. 459 .. 142 
Pattering R. r. (1829), 1 Mood. 242 76 
Poddick, R. r. (1865), 4 F. ft F. 497 208 
Paddifoot, R. r. (1829), 1 Mood. 

247. .800, 469 
Pngh r. Griffith (1838), 7 A. ft E. 

827,836.. 632 
Pnlbrook, R. r. (1839), 9 C. 4 P. 37 738 
— Ex parte (1892). 1 Q. B. 

86. .150, 1022, 1123 
Pulhaai, R. r. (1840), 9 C. A P. 280 87, 

90 
Purchase, R. r. (1710), 15 St Tr. 

645.. 943 

(1842), C. ft Mar. 

617.. 166, 167,560 
Psrcell r. Macnamara (1807), 9 

East, 157. .297, 298, 301 
Purefoj, R. r. (1794), Peake, Ev. 64 376 
PnrnelJ, R. r. (1748), 1 W. Bl. 37. . 357 
Puaev. R. r. (1726), 2 Str. 717 . . 132 
r>, K. r. (1790), R. ft R. 9». . . 305 
Pyke r. Croach (1696), 1 Ld. Raym. 

780 372 
Pyne's Case (1628), Cro. Car. 117!! 939 



QUAIL. R. r. (1866), 4 F. ft F. 1076 3, 

1294 
Qsalter, R. r. (1854), 6 Cox, 857 . . 322 
Qoarman r. Burnett (1840), 6 M. ft 

W. 499. . 466 
Queen Caroline's Case (1820), 2 B. 

ft B. 284. .838, 386, 405, 417, 424, 

1288 

Quekh, R. p. (1704), 14 St. Tr. 1067 542 

Qniglev, R. r. (1868), 18 L. T. 211 874 

Qaimi, R. p. (1898), 19 Cox, 78 (/r.) 1286 

— r. Leathern (1901), App. Cas. 

495. .843, 1159, 1162, 1281, 1282 



RAARE, R. r. (1838), 8 C. ft P. 626 733, 

784 
Radbonroe, R. r. (1787), 1 Leach, 

457.. 371 
Radcliffe r. Bartholomew (1892), 1 

Q. B. 161. . 97 



TAGE 

Radcliffe, R. r. (1746), 1 W. Bl. 8. . 181, 

199 

(1838), 2 Mood. 68. . 86 

Radfoid, R. v. (1844), 1 Den. 59 . . 719, 

975 
Radley, R. p. (1899), 1 Den. 450 . .72, 77 
Radyalski, R. v. (1899), 24 Vict. L. 

R. 687.. 798 
Rae, R. r. (1874), Ir. Rep. 8G.L. 

524. . 149 
Raffety, R. p. (1888), 2 Lewrn, 271 ' 529 
Ragg, R. p. (I860), Bell, 214 . . 602 
Rakma, R. p. (1886), Ind. L. R. 11 

Bombay, 59. . 845 
Raleigh's (Sir W.) Case (1603), 2 

St. Tr. 1, 15. . 931 
Ram, R. r. (1893), 17 Cox, 609 . .12, 908, 

1800 
Rambert p. Cohen ( 1 803), 4 Esp. 213 386 
Hampton, R. v. (1664), Kel. (J.) 41 805 
Ramsay p. Foote (1883), 15 Cox, 

231. .1022, 1133 
Ramsbottom, R. p. (1787), 1 Leach, 

25n . . 865 
Ramsden, R. p. (1827), 2 C. ft P. 

603.. 421 

(1843), 1 Cox, 37 529 

(1858), E. B.ft E. 

949. .1231, 1232 
Randall, R. p. (1811), R. ft R. 195. . 729, 

730 

(1842), C. ft Mar. 

496. .1185, 1219 
Randell, R. r. (1887), 16 Cox, 335. . 607 
Rankin, R. p. (1808), R. ft R. 43 . . 790 

(1848), 7 St. Tr. (N. 

S.) 711, 789. . 1099 
Ransford, R. r. (1870), 13 Cox, 9. .3, 814, 

1293, 1294, 1295m 
Ranson, R. r. (1812), R ft R. 232. .502,506 
Rastall p. Straton (1788), 1 H. Bl. 

40. 298 
Ratclirs Case (1592), 3 Co. Rep. 38 901 
Ratcliffe, R. r. (1882), 10 Q. B. D. 

74. .908 917 
Rathbone, R. r. (1841), C. ft Mar. ' 

220. .511, 513 
Randnitz, R. p. (1869), 11 Cox, 360 351 
Rarenscroft, R. p. (1809), R. ft R. 

161.. 787 
Rawlings p. Coal Consumers' Asso- 
ciation (1874), 43 L. 

J. (M. C.) HI.. 1089/* 

— p. Till (1837), 8 M. ft W. 

28.. 835 
Rawlinp, R, p. (1800), 2 East, P. C. 

617.. 469 

(1835), 7 C. ft P. 150 629 

(1838), 8 C. ft P. 439 1047 

Rawson, R. r. (1824), 2 B. ft C. 598 248 
Ray, Att.-Geo. p. (1843), 11 M. ft 

W. 464. • 144 
Res, R. p. (1865), 17 Ir. C. L. Rep. 

584.. 1097 

(1872), L. R. 1 C. C. R. 

865. .1175, 1178 



CV1 



Table of Ca$e*. 



TACE 

Bead c Brookman (1789), 3 T. B. 

151.. 880 

— n. Coker (1853), 13 C. B. 850 834 

— r. Operative Society of Stone- 

masons (1903), 2 K. B. 732 1160 

— ft Huggonson, lie (1742), 2 

Atk. 471. .1094, 1095 

— B.i\ (1708), II Mod. 142 ..1133 

(1848), 1 Deu. 377 . . 919 

(1852), 6 Cox, 134 . . 1221 

(1877), 8 Q. B. D. 131 . . 571 

Header ft Turner, B. r. (1830), 4 C. 

ft P. 245. .651, 662 
Beading, B. v. (1679), 7 St. Tr. 259 400 

(1795), 2 Leach, 590 75, 

302 

(1836), 7 C. 4 P. 649 837 

Beane, B. v. (1794), 2 East, P. C. 

735. .528, 524 
Beaney, B. r. (1857), Dean. ft B. 

151.. 821 
Bearden, B. v. (1864), 4 F. ft F. 76 808 
Beardon, B. v. (1866), L. B. 1C. C. 

B. 31., 87, 551 
Season ft Tranter, B. r. (1722), 16 

St. Tr. 1. .324, 793 
— B. n. (1854), Dears. 226. .510, 511 

(1872), 12 Cox, 228 . . 335 

Beculist, B. p. (1796), 2 Leach. 703 730 
Bedfem, B. r. (1884), 2 A. ft E. 387 109 
Bedford r. Birley (1822), 1 St. Tr. 

(N. S.) 1071.. 307, 1007, 
1098, 1099, 1100 

- B. r. (1869), 11 Cox, 867. . 561 
Bedhead (Yorke), B. t>. (1795), 25 

8t. Tr. 1008. . 209 
Redman, B. v. (1866), L. B. 1 C. C. 

B. 12. . 587 
Beed r. Lamb (1860), 6 IT. ft N. 75 1268 

— r. Nutt (1890), 24 Q. B. D. 

669. . 175 

— r. Passer (1795), Peake (3rd 

ed.), 303. . 

— R. r. (1837), 7 C. ft P. 848 . . 

(1838), 8C. ft P. 623 .. 

(1842), C. ft Btar. 806 . . 

(1854), Dear*. 168, 257 



(1871), 12 Cox, 1 



354 

602 

737 

445 

466, 

568 

1189 

Beeksprar, B. v. (1832), 1 Mood. 

842. . 924 
Bees r. Bowen (1825), McClel. ft Y. 

383 360 

— r,deBernardy(l896).2Ch.437 1080 

— R. t>. (1832), 5 C. ft P. 302 . . 249 

(1834), 6 C. ft P. 606 . . 844, 

510, 511 

(1886), 7 C. ft P. 568 . . 337, 

629 

(1888) (unreported) . . 874 

Btere r. Hodson (1853), 10 Hare, 

App. xix. .364, 379 
— B. r. (1872), L. B. 1C. C. B. 

362 833 
Beeves, B. r. (1839), 9 C. ft P. 25.' I 786 
Began, B. r. (1887), 16 Cox, 208 , . 316 



PACK 

Beid t. Margison ( 1808), 1 Camp. 

469. .316, 345 

— B. r. (1851), 2 Den. 88 . . 520 

— Ex parte (1885), 49 J. P. 600 8 
Beilly, B. r. (1787), 1 Leach, 454 . . 1070 
Remnant, B. r. (1807), B. ft B. 136 58, 

415 
Bendle, B. r. (1861). 11 Cox, 209.. 100 
Bentg. r r. Fogoesa ( 1549), Plowd. 1 22 
Rennie, B. r. (1825), 1 Lew in, 76 . . 29 
Benahaw, B. t>. (1847), 2 Cox, 285 83ft 
Beve', B. r. (1719), 1 Str. 421 .. 1097 
Reynolds, B. r. (1821), B. ft B. 465 870 

— r. U. S. (1878), 8 Otto, 

145. .1180a 

— ExparU (1882), 20 Ch.D. 

294. .899, 400 
Rhodes, B. v. (1704), 2 Ld. Raym. 

(1742), 1 Leach, 24.'! 354 

(1899), 1 Q. B. 77 . . 101, 

214, 308, 311, 893, 394, 

896, 596, 601, 615 

Bee, B. r. (1808), 8 Easr, 581. .789, 1115 

(1834), 6 C. ftP. 634 .. 740 

(1869), Bell, 87 . . . . 492 

(1866), L. B. 1 C. C. B. 

21.. 1197 
Bice v. Howard (1886), 16 Q. B. D. 

681.. 418 
Richard*, R. v. (1800), 8 T. B. 684 6, 

1222 

(1811), B. ft B. 193 730, 

737 

(1826), 7 D. ft B. 

665.. 1057 

(1828), 8 B. ft C. 

420. .136, 258 

(1832), 5 C, ft P. 

318. .881, 834 

(1832), 1 M. ft Bob. 

177. .68, 631 

(1844), 1 C. ft K. 

532.. 442 

(1844), 1 Cox, 62 . . 209, 

713 

(1866), 4 F. ft F. 860 872 

(1868), 11 Cox, 48 637 

(1877), 2 Q. B. D. 

811 21 1307 
Richards r. B. (1897), 66 L. J. (Q. B.) 

459. .21, 286 

(1897), 61 J. P. 389. . 1307 

Richard sou r. Anderson (1805), 1 

Camp. 65m. . 852 

— B. r. (1834), 1 M. ft 

Bob. 402. .1280,1284 

(I860), 8 Cox, 

448. .310, 674, 714 

(1868), 8 F. ft F. 

693.. 408 

(1890), 111 Cent. 

Ur. Ct. Seas. 

Pap. 612. . 1082 
Richardson p. Willis (1872), L. R. 

8 Ex. 69. .173, 860, 1134 



Tubte of Cases. 



cvn 



PAGE 

Richmond, R. r. (1843), i a k K. 

240. .172, 983 

(18^9), Bell, 142 767 

(1873), 12 Cox, 

495.. 468 
Kckefe, R. r. (181 1), 3 Camp. 68 842 
Kidman, R. r. (1789), 2 East, P. C. 

1094, 1035, 1037. .308, 841, 653, 654 
Kder, R. r. (1838), 8 C. 4 P. 539.. 210 
Kdgeley, R. r. (1778), I East, P. C. 

171.. 982 
Kidgvay, R. p. (1862), 3 F. k F. 838 602 
Ridley, R. r. (1811), 2 Camp. 650. .2, 872 

( 1823), R. k R. 515. .68, 1247 

Ridpsth, B. r. (1714), 10 Mod. 152 141 
Egby, R. v. (1839), 8 C. k P. 770 102, 

120 
Kfg, R. r. (1866), 4 F. k F. 1085 376 
Riley, R. r. (1851), 3 C. k K. 116. . 869, 

1247 

(1853), Dean. 149 . . 457 

(1866), 4 F. k F. 964.. 422 

(1887), 18 Q. B. D. 481 812, 

910,920 

(1896), 1 Q. B. 309. .703, 704, 

705, 707, 711, 764 
Rinaldi, R. 9. (1863), L. k C. 330. . 765 
King, R. v. (1800), 8 T. R. 686. .410, 413 

(1892), 61 L. J. (M. C.) 

116. .8, 464, 640, 1296 
Ripley, R. v. (1890), 17 Cox, 120 . . 1257, 

1269 
fiippier, R. r. (1897), 32 L. J. N. 

350.. 757 
Bpptner r. Wright (1819), 2 B. k 

Aid. 478.. 386 
Kitpal, R. r. (1762), 3 Ban. 1320. . 1281, 

1284 1292 
Bison, R. *. (1869), L. R. 1 C. C. R.' 

200. .708, 713, 727 

(1881), 15 Cox, 478 . . 841 

Robb, R. v. (1864), 4 F. k F. 59 .. 900 
Roberto r. Hani (1850), 15 Q. B. 17 1228 

- R. v. (1692), 4 Mod. 101 . .68, 73 

(1702), 2 East, P. C. 

487.. 633 

■ (1808), 1 Camp. 399. . 807, 

1280 

(1816), Can. Sopp.57 183 

(1886), 7 C. k P. 485 59 

(1842), C: k Mar. 652 734 

(1848), 2 C. k K. 607 409, 

1061 

(1352), Dean. 30, 32 71 

( 1855), Dean. 589 . .3, 982, 

1296 

(1857), 7 Cox, 422 (fr.) 708 

(1873),L.R.9Q.B.77 260 

(1878), 14 Cox, 101 . . 844, 

866, 1065, 1066 

(1897), 18 Cox, 530 . . 389, 

839 888 
Roberto v. Willi ami (1810), 12 East, ' 

88 84 439 
fobertoon, R. r. (1864), L. k C.488 525, 

685 



Bobey, R. r. (1833), 5C. k P. 552. . 248 
Robins, R. 9. (1787), 1 Leach, 290a 524 

(1843), 2 M. k Rob. 

512.. 312, 910 

(1844), 1 Cox, 114 . . 925 

(1844), IC.&K.456.. 900, 

901 

(L854), Dean. 418 .. 456 

Robinsou, R. t. (1568), 2 Rolle Rep. 

50.. 722 

(1746), 1 Leach, 87 1279 

(1755), 2 East, PC. 

566.. 461 

( 1759), 2 Bun. 799 .. 4, 5, 

1088 

(1765), 1W.B1. 541 145 

(1796), 6 T. R. 642, 

tit. . . 150 

(1796), 2 Leach, 749 812, 

533 

(1817), Holt (N. P.), 

595.. 301n 

(1817), R. k R. 321 80 

(1819), 2 Stark. 

(K. P.) 485.. 513 

(1881), 1 Mood. 327 632 

(1834), 1 Mood. 413 282, 

976 

(1837), 2M.& Rob. 

14. .536, 537 

(1841), 12 A. k E. 

672.. 175, 177 
Robinsoo, Re (1854), 28 L. J. (Q. B.) 

286 111 

— R. v. (1858), Bell, 84 . . 439, 473, 

612 

(1864), 4 F. k F. 45.. 435, 

550 

(1865), L. k C. 604 . . 978 

(1867), L. R. 1 C. C. R. 

80.. 828, 367, 1145 

(1887), 19 Q. B. D. 

822 . . 154 

(1897), 61J. P. 620 . . 417, 

418 
Robson o. Kemp (1803), 4 Esp. 238 402 

— R. v. (1820), R k R. 413 . . 462 
(1840), 9 C. k P. 428 738 

(1861), L. k C. 93 . . 459 

(1864), 4 F. k F. 360 213 

( 1885), 16 Q. B. D. 137 444, 

664 
Roche, R. v. (1775), 1 Leach, 134. . 171 
Roddam, R. v. (1777), 2 Cowp. 672 412 
Roden, R. r. (1874), 12 Cox, 630 .. 809 
Roderick, R. t>. (1837), 7 C. k P. 795 2 
Rodway, R. v. (1841), 9 C. k P. 784 450 
Roe, R. 9. (1870), 11 Cox, 664 .. 488 
Roebuck. K. v. (1856), Dean, k B. 

24 . . 602, 612, 616, 1186, 1296 
Rogan, R. 9. (1846), 1 Cox, 291 . . 813, 

420 
Rogers r. Hawken (1898), 67 L. J. 

(Q. B.)626.. 386 

— R. r. (1772), 1 Leach, 89, 

428 . . 627, 630 



CV1I1 



Table of Cases. 



PACK 

Rogers, R. r. (1811), 2 Camp. 654 304 
( 1838), 8 C. A P. 629 713 

(1839), 9 C. 4 P. 41 712, 

734, 737 

(1839), 2 Mood. 85 . . 706, 

960, 976, 980, 983 
(1851), 5 Cox, 293 . . 512 

(1868), L. R. 1 C. C. R. 

136.. 16,49, 549, 552 

• (1878), 3 Q. B. D. 28 48, 

559, 572 

(1902), 66 J. P. 825.. 8 

Bngier, R. r. (1823), 1 B. A C. 272 617, 

1198, 1200 
Kokebv, R. r. (1690), 1 East, P. C. 

312.. 813 
Rolf r. Dart (1809), 2 Taunt. 52 . . 345 
Rolfe, R. r. (1888), 52 J. P. 823 . . 270 
Rollet, R. r. (1875), L. R. 10 Q. B. 

469 1230 
Rookwood, R. r. (1696), 13 St. Tr! 

139.. 122, 306,404,939,940 
Rooke, R. v. (1858), 1 F. A F. 107 . . 854 
Rooncy, R. r. (183ti), 2 C. A P. 517 307 
Roope v. D'Avigdor (1883), 10 

Q. B. D. 412.. 265 
Roper r. Knott (1898), 1 Q. B. 868 702 

— R. v. (1737), 2 Str. 1072 . . 152 
Roscommon (Justices), R. v. (1894), 

2 Ir. Rep. 158 . . 129 
Rose r. Blakemore (1826), Ry. A M. 

382.. 405 

— R. r. (1784), 1 Leach, 342» . . 1018 

(1884), 15 Cox, 540 . . 792, 796 

(1898), 68 L. J. (Q. B.) 

289.. Ill, 112,331 
Rosenberg, R. r. (1843), 1 C. A K. 

233.. 460 

(1879), Odgereon 

Libel (3rd cd.), 21 1128 
Roacnblum, R. t>. (1898), Cent 

Crim. Court. . 1075 
Rosenstein, R. r. (1826), 2 C. A P. 

414 1193 
Rosier, R. r. (1821), 2 Phil. Ev! 

(7th ed.) 112.. 834 
Rosinski, R. r. (1824), 1 Mood. 19 . . 834 
Ross Tucket, R. r. (1844), 1 Cox, 

103.. 28 
Rothwell, R. 9. (1871), 12 Cox, 145 794 
Rough, R. u. (1779), 2 East, P. C. 307 437 
Rourke v. Mealy (1878), 4 L. R. 

Ir. 166 . . 1090a 

— R. r. (1819), R. A R. 386 . . 638 
Rouse, R. p. (1849), 4 Cox, 7 . . 610, 736 

(1904), 1 K. B. 184 . . 895 

Row, R. r. (1809), R. A R. 153 .. 882 
Rowe v. Brenton (1828), 8 B. A C. 

787.. 368 

— R. t>. (1846), 2 Mol. (Ir. Ch. 

27 283 

(1859), Bell, 93 !! 59 

(incert,), Rowe (Ir. K. 

B.), 288,418.. 



Rowed, R. r. (1842), 3 Q. B. 180 . . 



148 
72, 



926, 1188 



PACE 

Rowland ap Eliza, Re (1612), 3 Co. 

Inst. 164.. 1043 
Rowland, R. r. (1826), Ry. A M.401 394h 

(1858), 1 F. A F. 72 366, 

1066 

(1898), 62 J. P. 459 318 

Rowland p. Veale (1774), 1 Cowp. 18 893 
Rowlands, R. v. (1852), 17 Q. B. 

671.. 79, 131, 141, 

197, 292, 294, 1158, 

1278, 1280, 1282 

(1882), 8Q. B.D. 

530 . . 1149, 1150 

(1898), 62 J. P. 

459.. 320 

Rowler, R. r. (1806), R. 4 R. 110 750 

- — (1825), 1 Mood. Ill 1060 

(1825), Ry. & M. 299 1061 

Rowlon, R, r. (1865), L. k C. 520 . . 312, 

416 
Roxburgh, R. r. (1871), 12 Cox, 8 . . 833, 

864 1089 
Royce, R. 9. (1767), 4 Burr. 2073 . 1 219 
Ruck, R. 9. (1829), 2 Russ. Cr. (6th 

ad ) 46 624 
Rudd, R. c (1775), 1 Leach', 115*.'. 390, 

891 
Radge, R. p. (1874), 13 Cox, 17 . . 466, 

561 

(1886), 16 Q. B. D. 459 136, 

289 
Rudick, R. r. (1838), 8 C. A P. 237 59, 

526 
Ruding r. Smith (1821), 1 St. Tr. 

(N. S.) 1058. . 1172, 1174, 1175 
RudUnd, R. r. (1865), 4 F. A F. 

495 . . 208, 908 
Rue, R. r. (1876), 13 Cox, 209 . . 332 
Rugby Charity Trustees r, Merrv- 

weather (1790), 11 East, 376»". . 1222 
Rugg, R. r>. (1871), 12 Cox, 16 . . 2, 784, 

Bundle, R. r. (1855), Dean. 482 . . 874 
Rush, R. 9. (1896), 60 J. P. 777 . . 320 
Rushworth, R. r. (1816), R. A R. 

317.. 735 
RurseU (Earl), R. r. (1901), A pp. 

Cas. 446 . . 182, 1169 

— (Lord), R. r. (1683), 9 St. 

Tr. 577 . . 939 

— R. r*. (1805), 6 East, 427 . . 1216 
(1827), 6B. A C. 566 1184, 

1219, 1220 

(1831), 1 M. A Rob. 

122 . 924 
(1832), 1 Mood. 356*. '. 18, 

BO" 

(1833), 1 Blood. 877 632 

(1842), C. A Mar. 247 100 

(1842), C. A Mar. 541 652 

• (1854), 3 E. A B. 942 292 

Ruasen, R. r. (1777), 1 East, P. C. 

438. 911 

Russett, R. v. (189*2), 2 Q. B. 812 .1 451 

Rust, R. 9. (1828), 1 Mood. 183 .. 634 

Ruston, R. r. (1786). 1 Leach. 408 388 



Table of Ciues. 



cix 



RvalJf r. Leader (18€6), L. K. 1 

I jX. 296 • • 996 

- r. R. (1848), 11 Q. B. 781 . . 72, 

91, 231, 1050, 1056, 1058 
Ryan r. Shilcock ( 1851), 7 Ex. 72 . . 632 

- R. r. (1837), 2 Mood. 15 . . 79, 840 

(1839), 2 M. k Rob. 213 815, 

816, 820, 821, 842 

(IW6), 2 Cox, 115 . . 909 

(1855), 7 Cox, 109 . . 228 

Rrcroft, R. v. (1852), 6 Cox, 76 . . 71 
Ryder r. Malbon (1829), 8 C. k P. 

594.. 52 
ByUnd, R. r, (1867), L. R. i G C. 

K. 99.. 2, 70, 84, 886 

(1868), 11 Cox, 101 918 

Rymer. R. r. (1877), 2 Q. B. D. 136 2, 

1181 
Kvmes, R. r. (1853). 3 C. k K. 326 296 



S. r. S. (1889), 16 Cox, 566 . . 265 

Sedbarv, R. r. (1700), 1 Ld. Raym. 

484.. 1102 
Sedi, R. r. (1787), 1 Leach, 468 .' ! 1300 
Sadler, R. P . (1830), 4 C. k P. 

218.. 411 
Saraslmry, R. r. (1791), 4 T. R. 451 3, 

74, 1087 
St Andrew's (Holboro), R. r. (1674), 

1 Mood. 112.. 1225 
St Bcnet's (Cambridge), R. r. (1821), 

4 B. k Aid. 447 1222 
St George (Hanover Square), R. r. 

(1812), 8 Camp. 222 1225 
St George, R. r. (1840), 9 G k P. 

488.. 186, 821, 884, 848 
St Giles (Cambridge), R. *. (1816), 

5M.A SeL 260.. 1226, 1230 
St Giles in the Fields. See Chad- 

wick. 
St Helena Smelting Co. r. Tipping 

(1865), 1 1 H. L. G 642 . . 1 184, 1 185 
St John, R. r. (1839), 9 G k P. 40 67, 

68, 299 
St. Fancras, R. v. (1794), Peake 

3rd ed.), 286 . . 1224, 1228, 1229 
StWeonards, R. v. (1834), 6 G k 

P. 582 . . 1221 
Salford (Mayor, etc.) r. Lever (1891), 

1 Q. B. 168 . . 1273 
SatisbuiT, R. r. (1831), 5 G k P. 

155.. 513 
Salmon, R. r. (1802), R. k R. 26 . . 652 

(1880), 6 Q. B. D. 79 14, 

805 
Salomons, Ex parte (1898), 28 U 

J.N. 879.. 1149 
8alop, R. p. (1810), 18 East, 95 . . 1285 
Salt, R. r. (1862), 3 F. k F. 834 . . 812, 

721 
Salter, R. r. (1840), 5 Esp. 125 . . 1288 
Salvador. The (1870), L. R. 3 P. G 

218.. 956 



TAGR 

Salvi, R. r. (1857), 10 Cox, 481/* . . 171 
Sampson, R. r. (1846), 1 Cox, 355 562 

(1885), 52L.T.772 612 

Samuel r. Pavne (1780), 1 Dong. 359 806, 

894 
Sanchar (Lord), R. r. (1612), 9 Co. 

Rep. 119 . . 19, 1303 
Sanders, R. r. (1839), 9 G k P. 79 641 

(1867), L. R. 1 G G 

R. 75 . . 810, 863 
Sanderson, R. v. (1858), 1 F.A F.37 690, 

854 

(1859), 1 F. k F. 

598 . . 809, 867 
Saadon, R. r. (1854), 3 E. k R 

540.. 1211 
Sandoval. R. r. (1887), 16 Cox, 206 291, 

956, 959 
8andvs, R. r. (1841), C. k Mar. 345 327 

(1844), 1 Cox, 8 . . 530 

Sanger r. U. S. ( 1891), 144 U. S. 310 279 
Saogiovanni (1904), 68 J. P. Rep. 

54.. 118 
Sanson*, R. r. (1850), 1 Den. 545 . . 326, 

327 
Sargent, R. v. (1865), 10 Cox, 171 . . 740 
Sarmon, R. r. (1758), 1 Burr. 516 . . 120 
Satchwell, R. r. (1878), L. R. 2 

GG R.21.. 663 
Battler, R. r. (1858), Dears, k B. 

525 . . 33, 40, 42 
Saunders, R. r. (1578), Plowd. 473 17, 

798, 130-1 

(1826), 5 D. k R. 

661 . . 131 

(1836), 7 G k P. 

277.. 784 

(1838), 8 G k P. 

265.. 909 

(1847), 2 Cox, 249 111 

( 1 847), 10 Q. B. 484 149 

(1875), 1 Q. B. D. 15 1191, 

1193 

(1898), 63 J. P. 24 398, 

394 

(1899), 1 Q. B. 490 276, 

296, 817, 818 
Saunders v. Holborn District Board 

(1895), 1 Q. B. 64 . . 4, 1181 
Savage, R. v. (1824), 1 Mood. 51 . . 205 

(1881), 5 G k P. 143 450 

(1843), 1 G k K. 75 123 

(1876), 13 Cox, 178 . . 1171, 

1173, 1176 
Savile r. Jardine (1795), 2 H. BI. 

531.. 1127 

— R. r. (1852), 18 Q. B. 703 . . 151 

Sawdon, R. v. (1888), 2 Lewin, 1 17 . . 204 

Sawyer, R. v. (1815). R. k R. 294 . . 37, 415 

Sayer v. Glossop (1848), 2 G k K. 

694.. 1170 
Scaife, R. r. (1836), 1 M. k Rob. 551 824 

(1841), 10 L. J. (M.G) 

44.. Ill 

(1851), 17 Q. B. 238 . . 291, 

371, 872 



ox 



Table of Case*. 



TkUY. 

Scaife, R. ». (1802), 18 Q. B. 773 . . 135 

Scalbert, R. p. (1794), 2 Leach, 620 224 

Scarborough, R. p. (1848), 3 Cox, 72 56 
Scattergood r. Sylvester (1850), 15 

Q. B. 506 . . 269 
Sehlesinger, R. r, (1847), 10 Q. B. 

670.. 1050, 1055 

Schleter, K. r. (I860), 10 Cox, 409 183 
Schmidt, K. r. (1866), L. R. I C. C. 

K. 15.. 553 
Schofield, Ex parte (1877), 6 Ch. D. 

230 . . 328 

Scofield. B. p. (1784), (aid. 397 .. 2, 1293 
Scott, Ex parte (1829), 9 B. A C. 

446.. 187 
Scott r. Att-Geu. (1886), 11 P. D. 

128.. 1175 

— R. r. (1761), 3 Burr. 1262 . . 1102 

— (1785), 1 Leach, 401 .. 178 
(1801), R. 4 R. 13 .. 61 

— (1842), 2 Q. B. 248* . . 1085 

— (1856), Dears. A B. 47 328 

(1877), 2 Q. B. D. 415 362, 

1056, 1060, 1065 
Scott- Jan-is, R. r. (1876), Timet, 

Nov. 20.. 112 
Scott r. Brown (1885), 51 L. T. 746 1111 

(1892), 2Q. B. 724 1039*, 

1280 1283 
Scott r. Lewi* (1836), 7 C. A P. 847 360 

— r. Sebright (1886), 12 P. D. 31 398 

— r. Shepherd (1773), 2 W. Bl. 

892 836 
Scotton, R. r. (1844), 5 Q. B. 493.7 1047, 

1249 
Scudder, R. r. (1828), 8 (-. 4 P. 605 828 
Sculley, R. r. (1903), 23 N. Z. L. K. 

380.. 830n 
Scully, R. v. (1824). 1 C. A P. 819 . . 797 
Scutt r. Hawkins (1622), 2 Rolle 

Rep. 248.. 1180 
Seaford (Justices), R. p. (1763), 1 W. 

Bl. 432 . . 148 
Searing, R. r. (1818), R. A R. 350 . . 439 
Searle, R. p. (1831), 1 M. A Rob. 75 28 
Sears, R. p. (1789), 1 Leach, 415n . . 446 
Seberg, R. r. (1870), L R. 1 C. C. 

R. 164.. 40, 386, 860 
Sedley, R. r. (1663), 1 Sid. 168 ; 17 

St. Tr. 155»..14o, 1188 
Sefton, R. p. (1811), R. 4 R. 202 . . 630, 

646 
Selby r. Harris (1698), 1 Ld. Raym. 

745 . . 359 
Self, R. r. (1776), 1 Leach, 137 . . 2, 

784, 808 
Sell, R. p. (1840), 9 C. A P. 346 . . 186 
Sellen p. Norman (1829), 4 C. A P. 

80 . . 2, 872 
Sellers, R. p. (1796), Car. Snpp. 283 324 
Sellis, R. p. (1837), 7 C. A P. 850 . . 786 
Selten, R. p. (1871), 11 Cox, 674 . . 789 
Selvester r. U. S. (1898), 170 U. S. 

262 . . 88 222 
Semayne's Case (1604), 5 Co. Rep. 91 ' 811 
Semple, R. r. (1786), I Leach, 420 . . 454 



TAGS 

Senior, It <-. (1832), I Mood. 346 . . 785, 

788 

(1899), 1 Q. B. 283 .. 2, 

702, 784, 798, 803, 804, 
854,890 

(1899), 34 L. J. N. 100 395 

Seriant, R. r. (1669), 1 Sid. 414 . . 102 
Serjeant, R. r. (1826), Ry. A M. 352 398, 

898 
Seme, R. r. (1887), 16 Cos, 311 . . 656, 

"*Qit 

(1888), 107 C«nt Crim. 

Ct Seas. Pap. 418 . . 171. T09 
Serva, R. r. (1845), 1 Den. 101 . . 41, 389, 

406 
Seton, R. r. (1797), 7 T. R. 373 . . 132, 

147, 279 
Seward, R. p. (1834), 1 A. A E. 706 1279, 

1284, 1287 
Shacklington, R. r. (1734), Andr. 

201N..148 
Shakespeare, R. r. (1808), 10 Kant, 

83.. 163 

(1899), 83 L. J. 

K. 615.. 339 
Sharman, R. r. (1854), Dears. 285 . . 703, 

704 
Sharpe, R. r. (1838), 8 C. A P. 436 754 

(1848), 3 Cox, 288 .. 1099, 

1102 

(1854), Dears. 415 .. 43 

(1857), Dean. A B. 

160 1"'08 

Sharpless, R. r. (1772), 1 Leach, 93 458 

(1792), 4 T. R. 777 6 

Shaiwin, R. r. (1785), 1 East, P. C. 

421 . . 531 

Shaw, R. r. (1810), 12 East, 479 . . 346 

(1823), R. A R. 526 . . 359, 

1080, 1035 

(1826), 6 D. 4 R. 154.. 116 

(1834), 6a A P. 372.. 790 

(1865), L. & C. 679 . . 408, 

1047, 1061, 1067 

(1868), L. R. 1 C. a R. 

145.. 874 

(1888), 16 Cox, 503 .. 404 

Shaw r. Gould (1868), LK.8H.L 

66.. 1179 
— r. Shaw (1861), 2 Sw. A Tr. 

517.. 1078 
Shawe, R. r. (1816), 5 M. k Set 403 88, 

125, 143 

Shea r. R. (1848), 8 Cox, 141 {Tr.) 841 

— R. p. (1856), 7 Cox, 147 (/r.) 445 

Sheard, R. p. (1837), 7 C. A P. 846 841 

Sheares, R. p. (1798), 27 St Tr. 265 101, 

121, 122, 163, 164, 946 
Sheen, R. r. (1827), 2 C. A P. 634 . . 173, 

174 
Sheering, R. p. (1836), 7 C. * P. 440 248 
Sheffield, R. p. (1787), 2 T. R. 106 1225 
— Canal Co., R. p. (1849), 18 

Q.B.918.. 1231 
Sbellard, R. r. (1840), 9 C. A P. 277 807, 

1288 



Table of (Vd. 



tli 



Sheldon, ft. r. (1877), 32 U T. 27 . . 188 
Shepherd. R. r. (1886), 7 a 4 P. 579 334 

(1856), Dean. 606 511 

(1862). L. & C. 147 804 

U«68), LR.1C.C. 

R. 118.. 90, 436, 484, 

485 

(1869). 11 Cox, 825 1158 

Sheppnl. R. r. (1778), 1 Leach. 101 201, 

206 

(1781,1 Leach, 226a 718, 

733 

(1810), R. 4 R. 169 843, 

718 

(1838), 9 CAP. 121 454 

(1868), 11 Cox, 302 669 

Shergo'd r. Hollowav (1734), 2 Str. 

1002.. 893 
Sheridan. R. r. (1768), 1 East, P. C. 

438 . • 911 

(181 1), 31 St Tr. 548 101, 

164 
Sheriff, B. r. (1900), 35 L. J. N. 664 893 
Sberingnam U. D. C. r. Halsey 

(1904), 68 J. P. Rep. 395 . . 1223 
i, R. r. (1866), L. R. 1 C. C. R. 

20. .864, 1101 
i, R. r. (1786), Cas. (K. B.) 

temp. Hard. 303 . . 893n 
Shmas r. de Rntzen (1895), J Q. B. 

918.. 35 
tariff, R. r. (1903), 20 Cox, 384 . . 210, 

211,489 
S h err i n gt on, R. r. (1789), 1 Leach, 

518.. 66 
Sherwood. R. r. (1824), 2 L. J. (O. S.) 

K. B. 78.. 149 

(1844), 1 C.4K.556 794 

(1M7), Dears. 4 B. 

251.. 602 
Shiekle, R. r. (1868), L. R. 2 C. C. R. 

158.. 489 
Shields. R. r. (1802), 28 St. Tr. 414 228 
Shillfeo r. Thompson (1875), 1 Q. 

B. D. 12.. 2, 1168, 1186 
SUmain, R. r. (1882), 15 Cox, 122 210, 

211 
Shipley Pariah Council, R. r. (1897), 

18 Cox, 530.. 1211, 1222, 1225 
Shepfee r. Nathan (1892), 1 Q. B. 

245 . . 1084 
SWm* r. Wilson (1839). 9 CI. * i\ 

855.. 1020 
»•«, R. r. (1851), 8 C. 4 K. 206 . . 93, 918 
SbotU Iron Co. r. InajliK (1882), 7 

A pp. Cas. 518 . . 1185 
Sfcimhory (Justice*), K.r. (1788), 



PACK 

Shuttlewortb, R. *. (1851), 2 Den. 

351 . . 185, 1820n 
Sidcbottom r. Adkins (1858), 27 

L. J. (Ch.) 152 . . 399 
Sidney (Algernon), R. r. (1683). 9 

St Tr. 817.. 939, 940 
Sidoli, R. r. (1888), 1 Lewin, 65 . . 102 
Silberaton, R. r. (1899), 129 Cent. 

Crim. Ct Seas. Pap. 872 . . 1274, 1275 

Sill r. K. (1858), IE. 4 R 553 .. 594 

— R. r. (1858), 17 Jnr. 208a . . 285 

Sills p. Brown (1840), 9 C. 4 P. 601 877 

Silvcrlock, R. r. (1894), 2 Q. B. 766 85, 

281, 388, 887, 696, 716 
Simcox r. Yardley R. D. C. (1906), 

69 J. P. 66.. 1225 
Simmonds, R. r. ( 1828), 1 C. 4 P. 84 414 

(1884), 1 Hood. 

408. . 49 
8immonite, R. r. (1843), 1 Cox, 80 108 
Simmon*, R. r. (1859), Bell, 168 . . 1046 
Simmonsto, R. r. (1848), 1 C. 4 K. 

164.. 1178 
Simons, R. *. (1773), 2 East, P. C. 

712.. 526 

(1773), 2 East, P. C. 

731.. 624 

(1884), 6 C. 4 P. 540 887, 

376 
Simpson r. Att.-Gen. (1904), A pp. 

Cas. 476.. 1219 

— r. Ready (1844), 12 M. 4 

W. 786. . 80 

— R. r. (1829), 1 Lewin, 172 788 

(1884), 1 Hood. 410 888 

(1841), 6 Jnr. 462 . . 138 

(1842), C. 4 Mar. 669 671 

( 1850), 4 Cox, 275 . . 611 

(1864), Dears. 421 . . 680 

(1888), 15 Cox, 828 1170 

(1898), 62 J. P. 826 875 

(1908), 1 K. B. 468. . 1204 

Sims, R. r., Tidd (N. P.) 64. cit. . . 190 
Simwn, K r. (1664), Kel. (J.) 31.. 468 
Sinclair, R. r. (1867), 18 Cox, 28 . . 884 

Lord Advocate r. (1890), 
17 Rettie, Just. Cas. 88 187 
Stndercome, R. r. (1667), 5 St Tr. 

811. • 929 
Singleton r. Ellisoo (1895), 1 Q. B. 

607.. 1195 
Sirdar Gurdvsl Singh r. Faridkote 
(Rajah) (1894), App. Cas. 670 . . 
Sissingbnrst House Case (1673), 1 

Hale, 462. . 
Siseons r. Dixon (1826), 6 B. 4 (\ 



758 
2 Barnard. 272 . . 148 Six-mile Biidge Case (1852), 6 Coxj 



37 

14 

842 



— (Mercers of) r. Hart 

(J82«), 1 C * P. 118 857 
MmpKm, R. r. (1S6J). 2 Den. 319 313, 

1820a 
tMMri, K. r. (181 1), K. * R. 200 719, 



122 (/r.).. 169 
Skeen, R. r. (1869), Bell, 97 . .496, 497 
Skeet, R. r. (1866), 4 F. 4 F. 931. .14, 806 
Skerrit, R. r. (1826), 2 C. 4 P. 427 970 
Skinner, R. r. (1592), K. B. Roll . . 988 

(1778), Lofft65 .. 1132 

8kipworth*s Case (1873), L. R. 9 Q. 

B. 280 . . 1095 



CXJ1 



Table of dues. 



I'ACK 

Skutt, R. r. (1774), 1 Leacti, 106 . . 518 
Blade r. Drake (1017), Hob. 2115 . . 710 
Slane Peerage Case (1855), 5 CI. A 

Slaney, R. r. (1862), 5 C. A P." 213* 388, 

899 

Slater r. Aahton-under-Lyne( Mayor) 

(1852), 18 Q. B. 398.. 1230 

SUtor, R. r. (1882), 8 Q. B. D. 267 330 

Slatterier. Poolcy (1841), 6 M. A 

W. 661. .316, 386 

Slaughter, R. r. (1831), 4 C. & P. 

544m.. 832 

Sleeman, R. r. (1853), Dears. 249 . . 333 

Sleep, R. v. (1861), L. A C. 44 . . 1010 

< (1864), 9 Cox, 559 . . 825 

Sloggett, R. r. (1856), Dean. 656. . 328, 

30,9 

Slowly, R. r. (1873), 12 Cox, 269 . . 451 
Slowman r. Dutton (1834), 10 Bing. 

402.. 1130 
Small, R. p. (1887), 8 C. A P. 46 .. 451 
SmaUbones, R. r. (1898), 83 L. J. 

N. 123. . 289 
Smallman, R. r. (1897), 1 Q. B. 4. . 63, 

562 
Smalt r. Wkitmill (1736), 2 Sir. 

1054. .411, 413 
Smartle r. William* (1694), 1 Salk. 

280.. 863 
Smith r. Blandy (1825), Ky. & M. 

257. . 338 

— r. Dear (1903), 67 J. P. Rep. 

244 ; 20 Cox, 458. . 439, 
472, 488 

— r. Huaon (1811), 1 Philli- 

more, 287.. 1173 

— r. Mall (1622), 2 Rolle Rep. 

263 73 

— r. Moody (1903), 1 K. B. 156 1162 

— r. Sydney (1870), L. R. 6 Q. 

B. 203. .892, 898 

— r. Taylor (1806), 1 B. A P. 

(X. R.) 196. . 1131 

— r . Thomaason ( 1890) , 16 Cox, 

740. . 1161 

— r. Williams (1892), 56 J. P. 

840. 692 

,- R. r. (1710), Fost. 242 ! ! 337 

(1713),BagadeSecreti8 938 

(1716), 2 East, P. C. 

497.. 626 

(1766), 2 East, P. C. 

783, 784. . 523 

(1780), 2 Doug. 441 . . 5 

(1796), 7 T. R. 80 . . 149 

(1802), 4 Esp. Ill . . 1217 

(1804), 8 Ross. Cr. (6th 

ed.) 132. . 797 

(1814), R. A R. 267. .561, 568 

(1817), R. A R. 839. .871, 872 

(1818), R. A R. 868 . . 529, 

1018, 1249 

(1820), R. & R. 4 17. .625, 632 

(1823), R. A R. 516 . . 562 

(1825), Rv. A M. 295 . . 486 



Smith, R. r. 



Smith r. R. 
— Itr, 



1826), 
1827), 
1827), 
1828), 
1828), 
1831), 
1831). 

1831), 

1833), 
1833), 
1835), 
1837), 
1837), 
1887), 

1838), 
1838), 

1843), 
1844), 

1845), 
1SM5), 
1845), 
1847), 
1847), 
1849), 
1849), 

1852), 

1852), 
1858), 

1853), 
1855), 

1856), 



TACK 

2 CAP. 449.. 89* 
2 CAP. 638.. 721 
1 Mood. 178 632, 643 
8B. AC. 841.. 865 
3C. A P. 412.. 99 
4CAP. 411.. 721 
4 C A P. 569 . . 659, 
660, 679, 681 
5C. A P. 107.. 7a8 

1 Mood. 402 . . 57 
1M. A Rob. 256 626 
7C. A P. 147.. 58 
8 C. A P. 153. .2, 872 
8 C. A P. 173 . . 841 
8 C. A P. 160 . . 790, 

791, 797w 

2 M. A Rob. 109 
2 M. A Rob. 115 



2 Mood. 295 . . 
1C.AK.423.. 



121 
639, 
641 
729 
461, 
469 
783 
22 
340 
1309 
738 
125 



.. 1150 
.673, 674 

.. 606 
. . 551 



1 Den. 79 

1 Cox, 260 

2 C A K. 207 
2 Cox, 238 
2 Cox, 858 
18 Q. B. 788 

1 Den. 510. .277, 278, 
522,588 

2 Den. 449. .501, 502, 

526 

6 Cox, 31 

6 Cox, 198 

6 Cox, 814 

Dean. 494 

Dear*. 559. .816. 820, 

842 

1856), Dean. 561 . . 502 
1858), Dean. A B. 583 31, 

1858), Dears. A B. 566 604. 

704 
1858), IF. A F. 86 ..1169 
1862), L. A C. 131 . . 7 
1862), L. A C 168 . . 741 
1865), L. A C 607 . .2, 324, 

1865), 4 F. A F. 1099.. 1045 
1866), 4 F. A F. 1066.. 794 
1867), L. R. 1 C. C. R. 

110. .1047, 1067 
1869), 11 Cox, 210.. 779, 

806 
1870), LR.1C.C.R. 

266. .444, 550, 1305 
1878), 12 Cox, 697 • . 270 
1887), 16 Cox, 170 . . 322 
1892), 17 Cox, 601. .256, 402 
1896),17N.S.W.Rep. 

(Law) 104.. 276 
1897), 18 Cox, 470. .823, 880, 

660,828 
1898), 62 J. P. 231. .427, 1181 
1901), 65 J. P. 621 .. 1181 
1905), 69 J. P. Rep. 51 616 



Table of Cases. 



cxui 



TA.QE 

Smith k York, K. r. (1902), 37 L. J. 

Newsp. 89. . 853 
Stnyti, R. i*. (1832), 5 C. k P. 201 628, 

1111 
Smythies, R. r. (1849), 1 Ben. 498 47, 

48, 711, 1168 
Soell r. Webliog (1676), 2 Lev. 150 1129 
Soelling, B. p. (1858), Dears. 219. . 787 
Snow, K. r. (1776), 1 Leaeb, 151 

789 790 
Snowier, R. r. (1830), 4 C. * P. 390 ' 557 
Same, R. v. (1738), Andr. 272 . . 147 
Soares, R. r. (1802), R. k R. 25. .13, 720 
Solan, B. r. (1900), 21 N. Z. L. R. 

217. . 92 
SoiiU r. Yarrow (1831), 1 M.&Rob. 

133.. 383m 
Solomon, R. r. (1825), Rv. k M. 

252 . 1084 
Solomons, R. p. (1830), 1 Mood. 292 5 

(1890), 17 Cox, 93 451, 

615 
Somerset (Earl), R. p. (1630), 2 St. 

Tr. 965. . 16 
Somersetshire (Justice*), R. r. 

(1822), 1 D. k R. 443. . 147 
Somerton, R. p. (1827), 7B.4C, 

468. .84, 560, 588 
Somerrile, R. r. {temp. Eliz.), 1 

Anderson, 104. . 938 
Soper, R. p. (1825). 3 B. * C. 857. . 74 
Sottomaror r. Do Barros (1879), 5 

P. D.94.. 1175 
Sorter, R. p. (1818), 2 Stark. (N. 

P.) 423. .122, 1055 
Southampton, R. p. (1852), 18 Q. B. 

841. .1236, 1239 

(1886), 17 Q. B. 

D.424 ..188, 1236, 

1237, 1238, 1239, 

1240 

(1887), 19Q.B. 

D. 600. .292, 1236, 1240 
Southampton k Essex (Earls), R. r. 

(1600), 1 SL Tr. 1833. .943, 944 
Soatfaern, R. r. (1821), R. k R. 444 1249 
Southerton, R. r. (1805), 6 East, 

126. .1094, 1163 
Souther v. Mash (1837), 7 C. k P. 

632.. 414 
— R. r. (1865), 4 F. k F. 864 27, 

184 
Soothport (Mayor, etc.), R. p. 

(1901), 65 J. P. 184 .. 1213 
Soothwood, R. r. (1858), 1 F. k F. 

356.. 1050 
Sowerbr, R. r. (1894), 2 Q. B. 178 596 
Spalding, R. r. (1842), C. k Mar. 

568.. 1264 
Spanner, R. r. (1872), 12 Cox, 155 634 
Sparkes, R. p. (1790), Peake (3rd 

ed.), 109, c'U. . . 402 

(1858), I F. k F. 888 894* 

Sparling, R. p. (1721), 1 Str. 498 . . 75 
Sparrow, R. r. (1788), 2 T. R. 198 162 

(I860), Bell, 298 . . 833 



PACK 

Spears, R. r. (1798), 2 East, P. C. 

563. .59, 461, 466 
Speed, R. p. (1882), 15 Cox, 24 . . 601 
Spenceley r. Schulenburgh (1806), 

7 East, 326.. 401 

— p. De Willot (1806), 7 

East, 108. . 424 
Spencer, R. p. (1783), 2 East, P. C. 

712.. 526 

(1815), R, k R. 299. . 562 

(1824), 1 C. 4 P. 260 360* 

363 
— - (1828), 3 C. k P. 420 605 

(1887), 7 C. k P. 776 832 

(1843), 1 C.& K. 159 1818 

(1866), Dears, k B. 

.131.. 662 

(1867), 10 Cox, 626. . 789 

Spicer, R. p. (1846), 1 Den. 82 . . 300, 

469 
Spieres r. Parker (1786), 1 T. R. 141 80 
Spiller, R. r. (1832), 5 C. k P. 333 788 
Spilling, R. r. (1838), 2 M. k Rob. 

107. . 788 
Spilsburv, R. r. (1855), 7 C. k P. 

187. .821, 884 

(1898), 2 Q. B. 615 110 

Spibbnry r. Micklethwaite (1808), 

1 Taunt. 146. . 895 
Spiro, R. p. (1900), 64 J. P. 794 . . 604 
Spittle, R. p. (1902), 18 T. L. R. 436 763 
Spokes v. Grosvenor Hotel Co. 

(1897), 2 Q. a 124. .816, 357, 400 
Sponsonbjr, R. r. (1784), 1 Ltach, 

832.. 716 
Spragg, R. r. (1760), 2 Burr. 928 . . 226 

(1760), 2 Burr. 993 . . 1281, 

1284, 1285 
Spragoe, R. p. (1899), 68 J. P. 233. . 1181 
Spriggt, R. p. (1834), 1 M. k Rob. 

357. .631, 633 
Squire, R. r. (1799), 3 Rubs. Or. 

(6th ed.) 13. . 784 

(1818), R. k R. 349 562, 

Squires, R. p. (1799), 1 Runs. Cr. 

(6th ed.) 151.. 31, 32 
Stafford (Marquis) p. Coyney (1827), 

7 B. k C. 257. . 1224 

— R. p. (1713) 916 

Staffordshire (Justices), R. p. (1819), 

1 Chit. (K. B.) 217 147 
— and Derbyshire, Re 

(1890), 64 J. P. 666 . . 1286 
Stainer, R. p. (1870), L. R. 1 C. (\ 

R. 230.. 564 
Staines Local Board, R. r. (1888), 

52 J. P. 215. . 219 
Stainhall, R. r. (1868), 1 F. k F. 

363.. 1234 
Stallard, Ex parte (1868), L. R. 3 

Ch. App. 403. .1146, 1147 
Stallion, R. v. (1833), 1 Mood. 398 652 
Stanbury, R. p. (1861), L. k C. 128 86, 

597 
StancUffe, R. r. (1869), 11 Cox, 318 270 



cxiv 



Talle of Cascn. 



TAOK 

Standlev, R. r. (181G), R. k R. 805 13, 

807 
Scanger, R. r. (1871), L. R. 6 Q. It. 

862. . 150 
Stanley r. Powell (1891), 1 Q. B. 

86. .782, 886 
Stannard, R. r. (1887), 7 C. & P. 

678. .211,4*1 

(1863), L. & C. 349 1197 

Stanton, R. r. (1851), 5 Cox, 824 . . 177 
Staples, R. r. (1788), Andr. 228 . . 145 
Btapleton r. Stapleton (1786), Cap. 

(K. R.) temp. Hardw. 277 402 

- R. r. ( 1680), Sir T. Ray m. 

867 206 
Stapyltoo, R. v. (1857), 6 W. K. 

60. .71, 1284 
Starey r. Chilworth Gunpowder Co. 

(1889), 24 Q. B. D. 90. . 1151 
Starling, R. r. (1664), 1 Sid. 174 . . 1280 
Statham, R. i». (1773), 1 Leach, 857, 

at. . . 59 
Staunton, R. r. (1827), 1 Ir. Law 

Rec (O. S.) 7. . 148 
Steer, R. r. (1848), 1 Den. 849 . . 277 
Btedman, R. r. (1704), Fost. 292 . . 798 
Steel r. Prickett (1819), 2 Stark. 

(N. P.) 468. . 1217 
— r. Smith (1817), 1 B. * Aid. 

94. . 80 
~ R. r. (1787), 1 Leach, 451 . .24, 188 

(1841), 2 Mood. 246 ..1288 

(1876), 1 Q. B. P. 482. . 162, 

1184 
— - (1876), 2 Q. B. D. 37 . . 289, 

1184 
Steele r. Brannan (1872), L. R. 7 

C. P. 261. .344, 996. 1023, 1190 

— p. Midland Ry. Co. (1866), L. 

R. 1 Cb. App. 275. . 847 

— R. r. (1872), 12 Cox, 168 .. 323 
Steer, R. r. (1848), 18 L, J. (M. C.) 

80 277 
Stenson, R. r. (1871), 12 Cox, 111!'. 311, 

1289 
Stephens r. Myers (1880), 4 C. k P. 

849.. 836 
-- R.r. (1866), L.R.1 Q. B. 

702. .892, 1186, 1220 

(1866), 7 B. k 8. 710 294 

(1871), 11 Cox, 669. . 210 

(1888), 16 Cox, 387 . 310, 

574 
Stephens (Raynor), R. r. (1839), 2 

St. Tr. (N. S.) 1189. .998, 1098 
Stephenson r. I*ngston (1804), 1 
Hagg. Consist. Rep. 

879. . 1251 

- R.r. (1841), 5 Jur. 841 188 

(1862), L. k C. 

165. .869, 370 

(1884), 13 Q. B. 

D. 331 . . 2, 3, 4, 5, 
154, 1208 

(1904), 68 J. P. 

Rep. 524. .598, 001 



r.\ot 
Stirling R. r. (1773). 1 Lcacl», 99. . 723 
Sterne, R. r. (1787), 1 Leach, 473.. 15 
Steven*, R. r. (1804), 5 East, 244 

73.83 

(1826), oB.cC. 

246.. 1057, 1062 

(1834), 1 Mood. 409 815 

(1844), 1 Cox, 88 . . 606 

Stevens r. Sampson (1879), 6 Ex. 

D. 53.. 996 
Stevenson, R. r. (1791), 2 Leach, 

546. .128. 214, 224 

(1861), 8F.c F. 

106. .2, 798, 1163,1186 
Steventon, R. r. (1802), 2 East, 

862. .1078, 1079, 1281 

(1843), 1 C. k 

K. 55. .68, 299, 1222 
Steward, R. r. (1690), 2 East, P. 

C. 702.. 624 

(1881), 2 B. k Ad. 

12.. 145,160 
Stewart, R. r. (1814), R. k R. 288 

3,980 

(1818), R. k R. 8C8 12, 720 

(1840), 12 A. k E. 

778. . 1207 

(1845), 1 C*x, 174 . . 205, 

452 

(1876), 13 Cox, 296. . 344, 

878 
Sttginani, R. r. (1867), 13 Cox, 

552.. 415 
Stiles ». Nokee (1806), 7 East, 498, 

505.. 1058 
Stirling r. Vanghan (1809), 11 East, 

619 865 
Stock, R. r. (1810), R. k R. 185. .625, 627, 

628 

(1825), 1 Mood. 87. .461, 469 

Stoekdale r. Hansard (1837), 8 St. 

Tr. (N. S.) 882. .998, 995 
Stoeken r. Collin (1841), 7M. k W. 

629. • 992 
Stocker, R. r. (1695), 1 Salk. 842, 

871. .78, 706 
Stockfcv, R. r. (1772), 1 East, P. C. 

810. .806, 812 

(1842), 8Q. B. 288 99, 

122 
Stockwell, R. r. (1902), 66 J. P. 376 111, 

1091 
Stoddart, R. r. (1901), 1 K. B. 177 1204 

— r. Hawke (1902), 1 K. B. 

858.. 1204 

— r. Sagar (1895), 2 Q. B. 

474. . 1207 
Stoke*, R. r. (1881), 6C.4P. 148 1040 

(1833), 6 CAP. 151 224 

- (1848), 1 Den. 307 .. 74 

(1852), 3 C. * K. 185 28, 

27, 190, 283 
Stolady, R. r. (1859), 1 F. k F. 

518. .1051, 1056 
Stone r. Blackburn (1798), I Esp. 

37.. 387 



Tabic of Cases. 



oxv 



rAOR 

Stone r. Marsh (1827), 6 B. A C. 551 268 

— r. Metcalf (1815), 1 Stark. 

(N. P.), 68.. 383 

— R. r. (1796), 6 T. R. 5*7. .213, 307, 

939, 940, 945, 946, 1278 
-— (1830), 4 C. 4 P. 879 . . 1093 

(1846), 1 Deo. 181 . . 737 

(1854), Dear*. 251 1045, 1071 

btonetaue r. Elliott (1795), 3 R. R. 

183. . 894 
StonoeU, R. r. (1845), 1 Cox, 1421 ! 361, 

1319 
Stopford, R. e. (1870), 11 Cox, 643 820, 

842 
Stonnootb, R. r. (1897), 61 J. P. 

729. .14. 786 
Storr, R. r. (1765), 8 Burr. 1698. .5, 1113 
Stores (Dr.) Case (1571), 1 St. Tr. 

1087.. 939 
Stoughton, R. r. (1730), 2 Star. 900 73 
Stowell, R. **. (1841), 1 Dowl. (K. 

S.)320.. 121 

(1843), 5Q. B.44 .. 36 

Strafford (Lord), R. r. (1640), 3 St. 

Tr. 1381. . 306 
Strata, R. r. (1855), 7 Cox', 85. .161, 581 
Storage, R. r. (1837), 8 C. A P. 172 89, 

840 

(1843), Greaves, ('rim. 

Coos. Acts (2nd ed.), Ill 474 
Stranger r. Searle (1793), 1 £ap. 14 383m 
Bfaatton, R. r. (1779), 1 Doug. 239 ; 

21 St Tr. 1046. .121, 
214 792 

(1809), 1 Camp. 549m 1280 

Stack, K. r. (1826), 2 C. 4 P. 413 128, 

214, 224 
8toeeter r. Bartlett (1848). 5 C. B. 

564. . 359 

— R. r. (1900), 2 Q. B. 601 . . 460, 

550 
Stitteh, R. r. (1835), 3 A. A E. 508 418 
Stretford, R. r. (1706), 2 Ld. Raym. 

1169.. 1225 
Stringer, R. r. (1842), 1 C. 4K. 188 525, 

531 
Stripp, R. r. (1856), Dean. 648 .. 827 
Strooer, R. r. (1845), 1 C. 4 K. 650 414 
Stroud, R.r. (1629). 3 St Tr. 235.. 989 

(1834); 6 C. 4 P. 536 469 

(1842), lCcK. 187 56, 57 

Stiwdger, R. r. (1886), 17 Q. B. D. 

827. .69, 85, 120, 1268 
Stuart r. Bell (1891), 2 Q. B. 341 . . 1132 

— R. r. (1894), 1 Q. B. 310 .. 568 

(1899), 84 L. J. N. 566 1014 

Stubba r. Director of Public Prose- 
cutions (1890), 24 Q. B. D. 

577. .10, 11, 259 

— R. r. (1855), Dears. 555 .. 276, 891 
Stadd, R. r. (1866), 10 Cox, 258 . . 277 

(1866), 14 W. R. 806. . 1112 

Staddy '. Sanders (1823), 2 D. A R. 

847. . 402 
Starge. R. r. (1854), 3 E. * B. 734* 297, 

1222, 1223 

A.OP. 



note 
Sturges r. Bridgman (1879), 11 Ch. 

D. 852.. 1184 
Stytche, R. r. (1901), 20N.Z. L. R. 

744 . 291 
Sullen*, R. p. (1826), 1 Hood. 129.' '. 462, 

466 
Sullivan, R. r. (1836), 7 C. 4 P. 641 802 

( 1838), 8 A. 4 E. 831 204 

(1841),C.4Mar.209 842 

(1868), It Cox, 44. . 990. 

994, 997 

(1874), Ir. Rep. 8 

C. L.404.. 



Summers, R. r. (1705), 2 East, P. 

C. 785. . 
(1869), L. R. 1 C. 

Cr» it 182. • 



392 
305 
275 
407 



Summers r. Moseler (1834), 2 Cr. 

4 M. 477. . 
Sunderland, R. r. (1837), 2 Lewin, 

109.. 1176 
Surrey (Justices), R. r. (1852), 1 

Bail. C. C. 70. . 1234 
Sussex Peerage Claim (1844), 6 St 

Tr. (N. S.) 79. .847, 1173 
Sitter, R. r. (1867), 10 Cox, 577 . . 603 
Sutton, R. r. (1784), 2 Str. 1074 . . 982 

(1736), Cas. (K. B.) 

temp. Hardw. 379. . 3 

( 1767), 4 Burr. 2116. . 122 

(1816), 4 M. 4 Sel. 

582. .304, 346, 851, 1181 

. (1828), 8 B. A C. 417 204, 

206 

(1832), 5 B. 4 Ad. 52 

292, 1226, 1228 

(1835), 8 A. A E. 597 23, 

1231, 1235 

(1838), 8 C. A P. 291 470 

(1838), 8 A. 4 E. 516 1161 

(1877), 13 Cox, 648 .. 297, 

1247, 1248, 1249 
Swallow, R. i*. (1813), 2 Rum. Cr. 

(6th ed.) 8.. 632 
Swain, R. r. (1838), 2 M. 4 Rob. 112 204 
Swan, R. r. (1751), Fort. 104 . . 163, 166 
Swans, Case of (1592), 7 Co. Rep. 

16.. 439 
Swatkius, R. r. (1831), 4 C. A P. 548 208, 

837 66** 
Sweenie, R. r. (1858), 8 Cox, 238 (Sc)' 909 
Sweetappla r. Jesse (1832), 5 B. 4 

Ad. 27 . 1130 
Sweeting, R. r. (1766), 1 East, P. 61 

457 . . 901 
Swendsen, R. r. (1702), 14 St. Tr! 

595 . . 898 
Swindall, R. v. (1846), 2 C. 4 K. 

230. .14. 16, 800, 802 
Swinnerton t. Stafford (Marquis) 

(1810), 3 Taunt 91.. 381 

- R. p. (1842), C. 4 liar. 

593.. 837, 338 
Swinson, R. r. (1900). 64 J. P. 72 . . 447 
Swiuton r. Molloy (1783), 1 T. R. 

537, cff. . . 896 



0XY1 



Tabic of Ca$e$. 



I'AGB 

Svdserff, R. r. (1847), 11 Q. B. 246 281, 

1282, 1285. 1290 
Svkes r. Beadon (1879), 11 Ch. D. 

170.. 1207 
Svmondson, R. r. (1896), 60 J. P. 

645 . . 796 
Szndurskie, R. r. (1885), 1 Mood. 429 717 



TA AFFE r. Downes (1812), 3 St. Tr. 

(N. S.)1317.. 893 
Tacey, R. r. (1821), R. 4 R. 452 . . 674, 

675 
Taffs, R. r. (1850), 4 Cox, 169 . . 563 
Taft, R. i». (1777), 1 Leach, 172 . . 714 
Tait, R. r. (1861), 2 F. 4 F. 553 .. 371 
Talbot r. Hodson (1816), 7 Taunt. 

251 . . 382 
Tallv, K. r. (1875), 82 Cent CrinY. 

Ct. Sess. Pap. 518.. 1078 

Tancock. R. r. (1876), 13 Cox, 217 171 

Tandy, R. r. (1799), 2 Leach, 833 . . 976 

— (Napper), R. r. (1800), 27 

St.Tr. 1 191 . . 
Tankard, R. r. (1894). 1 Q. B. 549 



Tannct, It. r. (1818), R. 4 R. 351 .. 
Tnplin. R. r. (1780). 2 East, P. C. 

712.. 
Tarlton r. Fisher (1781), 2 Doug. 

671.. 
Tarrant, R. v. (1767), 4 Burr. 2106 



938 

444, 

564 

770 



525 

893 
148, 
1279 



Tarry r. Newman (1846), 15 M. 4 W. 

645.. 488 
Tate, R. r. (1871), 12 Cox, 7 . . 1048 
Tatlock, R. r. ( 1876), 2 Q. B. D. 157 576 
Tattersal, R. r. (1806), 1 B. 4 P. 

(X. R.)93, 94ii. .. 811, 720 
Taunton r. CoBtar (1797), 7 T. R. 

431.. 1111 
Taylor r. Forster (1825), 2 C. P. 195 401 

— r. Goodwin (1879), 4 Q. B. D. 

228.. 855 

— r. Hawkins (1851), 16 Q. B. 

308 1182 

— r. Smetten (1883), 11 Q. B. D. 

207 . . 1207 

— R. r. (1675), 1 Vent. 293 . . 1022 

(1676), Stark. 81. (6th 

ed.) 615 . . 1022 

(1727), 2 Str. 849 . . 68 

(1742), 2 Str. 1167 . . 1186 

(1759), 1 Leach, 49 .. 652 

(1771), 6 Burr. 2798 . . 789 

(1779), 1 Leach, 214 . . 714 

(1785), 1 Leach, 856 . . 69 

(1785), 1 Leach, 360 . . 15 

(1790), Peake (3rd ed.), 

14 . . 889, 406 

(1803), R. 4 R. 63 . . 49, 559 

(180$), 1 Camp. 404 . . 1060 

(1820), R. 4 R. 418 . . 648 

(1824-5), 8 B. 4 C. 602, 

612.. 167, 172, 1200 



PAG* 

Taylor, K. *. (1882), 5 C. 4 P. 301 . . 249 

(1834), 2 Lewin, 215 . . 782 

(1839), 8 C. & P. 726 . . 422 

(1839), 8 C. 4 P. 738 . . 382 

(1840), 9 C. 4 P. 672.. 802 

(1841), 9 Dowl. 600 .. 120 

(1843), I C. 4 K. 213 717, 

783 
(1848), 3 Cox, 84 ,. 322 

(1851), 5 Cox. 138 .. 653 

(1859), 1 F. 4 F. 511 8, 

534,662 

(1867), 10 Cox, 544 . . 561 

( 1 869), L. R. 1 C. C. R._ 

194 . • ill, ©44 

(1869), 11 Cox, 840 .. 128 

( 1874), 13 Cox, 77 . .29, 327 

(1876), L.R.2C.C.R. 

147.. 17. 1304 

(1882), 15 Cox, 8 ..' 124 

(1883), 15 Cox, 265 .. 599, 

1280 

(1901), 65 J. P. 457 .. 610 

Tavlor r. K. (1895), 1 Q. B. 25 . . 70, 
72, 79, 85, 165, 280, 554, 596 
Teague, R. r. (1802), R. 4 R. 33 ; 2 

East, P. C. 979.. 713 

Teal r. Autev (1820), 2 B. 4 B. 99 386 

— R. r. (1809-10), 18 East, 4 .. 137, 

141, 404, 406 
Tempest, R. r. (1858), 1 F. 4 F. 

381 213 
Templar, R. r. (1836), 1 Xev. 4 P.' 

91.. 132 
Testick, R. r. (1774), 1 East, 181n 712 
Tew, R. r. (1855), Dears. 429 . . 98, 405 
Tewkesbury (Mayor), R. r. (1868), 

L.R. 8Q. B. 629.. 344 
Thallman, R. r. (1863), L. 4 C. 826 1188 
Tharpe r. Stallwood (1843), 5 M. 4 

G. 760.. 58 
Theriault, R. r. (1894), 82 New 

Brunswick, 504 . . 797n 
Thetford (Mayor, etc.) r. Norfolk 
County Council (1998), 2 

Q. B. 468.. 257 
Theving, R. r., 8 Harg. St. Tr. 79 939 
Thibault r. Gibson (1848), 12 M. 4 

W. 88 . . 80 
Thirgood, R. r. (1898), 68 J. P. 442 802 
Thistlewood, R. r. (1820), 33 St. Tr. 

681.. 937, 943 
Tboman, R. t\ (1871), 12 Cox, 54 . . 701 
Thomas p. David (1886), 7 C. 4 P. 

351.. 414 

— r. Newton (1827), M. 4 M. 

48n.. 899 

— r. Pritcbaid (1903), 1 K. R 

209.. 144 

— R. v. (1786), Cas. (K. B.) 

temp. Hardw. 278 240 

(1784), 1 Leach, 330 631 

(1800), 2 East, P. C. 

934 . . 82, 712 

<1815),4M.4Sel.442 180, 

132 



Table of Ca»e*. 



OXYU 



— PAO« 

Thorny R. r. (1823), 3D.AR. 621 121 

(1827), Car. Supp. 295 643 

(1830), 4C.4P. 287 670 

(1834), 6 C. <fc P. 353 331 

(1837), 7 CX & P. 345 384 

(1837), 7 G. k P. 817 29, 

376 794 

(1837), 7 C. * P. 851 ' 738 

(1837), 7 A. 4 E. 608 150 

(1841), 9 C. * P. 741 447 

(1843), 1 Cox, 52 . . 322 

(1849), 2 C. k K. 806 1065 

(1853), 6 Cox, 403 . . 562 

(1857), 7 E. <fc B. 399 1211 

(1863), L. & C. 313 . . 276, 

277, 1015 

(1869), 11 Cox, 535 . . 1143, 

1144 

(1875), L R. 2 C. C. 

R. 141 . . 215, 978 
TboiMs, Re (1894), 1 Q. B. 747 . . 1080 
TkeaiMon, K. r. (1781 ), 2 East, P. C 

515 

(1783), 1 Leach, 291 

( 1784), 1 Leach, 338 

( 1 796), 2 Leach, 771 

(1801), 2 Leach, 910 80, 

712 

(1825), 1 Mood. 78 463, 

530 

(1825), 1 Mood. 80 793, 

807 894 

(1826), 1 Mood. 189 ' 779 

(1832), 3TVr. 53.. 117 

( 1841), 2 M. k Rob. 

355.. 1265 

(1843), 1 Cox, 43 . . 261 

(1846), 1 Cox, 268.. 102 

(1847), 2 Cox, 377, 

445.. 67, 628 

(1850), 1 Den. 549.. 459 

(1851), 16 Q. B. 832 7, 

95, 215, 1017, 1278, 1286 

(1862), I*, k C. 225 463, 

527 

(1862), L. k C. 233 

(1863), 3 F. k F. 

824.. 
(1869), 11 Cox, 862 



634 
331 
643 
626 



599 

399 
637 



(1872), L. R. 1 



CC. R. 377.. 399 

(1876), 13 Cox, 181 370, 

414, 415 

(1893), 2 Q. B. 12 ; 

17 Cox, 641.. 331, 835 

(1900). 64 J- P. 456 1190, 

1194 
Thornton, B. r. (1795), 2 Kw«J. Cr. 

(6th ed.) 283.. 48 
Therley r. Kerry (Lord) (1812) 4 

Taunt. 335 . . 1 127 

— B. r. (1832). 1 Mood. 343 657 

Tho», R. p. ({841)/a A M« «^»j, 

Tketnhill, B. p. (183S), 8C.4P. *76 '325, 



Thornton, B. r. (1860), 4 Ex. 820 . , 137 

Thorp, B. p. (1696), 5 Mod. 221 . . 1277 

Thorpe, R. r. ( 1829), 1 Lewin, 171 . . 790 

(1858), Dean, k B. 562 570 

Thorpe p. Priestnall (1895), 1 Q. B, 

153 876 
Threlkeld r. Smith (1901), 2 K. B. 

531 • • 475 

Thring, B. p. (1832), 5 C. k P. 507* 862 

Thrower, B. r. (1672), 1 Vent. 208 6 

Tbnrboro, R, p. (1849), 1 Den. 887 440, 

446 
TibbitB k Windust, R. p. (1902), 1 

K. B. 77 . .2, 146, 993, 997, 1095, 
1276, 1277, 1281, 1292, 1295* 
Tibshelf, R. p. (1830), 1 B. k Ad. 

190 . . 1175 
Tiddemaa, B. p. (1850), 4 Cox, 389 536 
Tierney, R. p. (1804), R. k R. 74 . . 1005 
Till Adam p. Bristol (1834), 4 N. k 

M. 144 • • 97 
Tilley, R; p. (1795), 2 Leach* 662.'! 1030 
Tilson, R. r. (1858), 1 F. k F. 54 . . 1172 
Timmins, R. p. (1836), 7 C. k P. 499 802 

(1860), Bell, 276 .. 900 

Timolhy, R. p. (1858), lF.kF.89 1289 

- r. Simpson (1835), 1 Cr. 

M. k K. 757 . . 808. 894 
Tinckler, R. r. (1781), 1 East, P. C. 

354 ; 1 Den. v. . . 324, 338, 390 
Tindall, R. p. (1837), 6 A. k B. 143 1185, 

1219 1220 
Tippr t, R. r. (1823), R. & H. 509 . .' 338 
Tippin, R. p. (168a), 2 Salk. 494 . . 110 

(1842), C. k Mar. 545 58 

Tite, R. p. (1861), L. k C. 29 . . 565, 567 
Titley, R. p. (1880), 14Cox, 602. . 165, 830 
Tiverton (Mayor), R. p. (1723), 8 

Mod. 186 . . 145 
Tivey, R. p. (1844), 1 Den. xviii. 63 693 
Toakley, R. p. (1866), 10 Cox, 406 212a 
Todd, R. r. ( 171 1 ), 1 Bast, P. C. 653 69 
Tolfree, R. p. (1823), 1 Mood. 243 . • 469 
Tollett, R. r. (1841), C. k Mar. 112 459, 

460 
Tolson, R. r. (1864), 4 F. k F. 103 1170 

(1889),28Q.B.D.168 12, 

33, 84, 844, 1179 
Tomlinson p. Brittlebank (1833), 4 

B. & Ad. 630.. 1130 
— B. p. (1885), 7 C. k P. 183 866 

■ ( 1866), L.R. ICC. 

R. 49 . . 1044 

(1895), 1 Q. B. 706 633 

Tonge, R. p. (1662), 6 St. Tr. 225 . . 838, 

938, 941 
Tongue, B. p. (1860), Bell, 289 .. 563 
Tooke (Home), B. p. (1794), 25 St. 

Tr. 1, 127 . . 306. 313 

. (1794), 1 East, 

P. C. 98.. 940 
Toole, R. p. (1867), 11 Cox, 75 (/r.) 1015 
Tooley, B. p. (1710), 2 Ld. Raym. 

1296 . . 806 
Topham, R. r. (1791), 4 T. R. 126 . . 994, 

1128,1130 



0XVI11 



Table of Case*. 



PICE 

Topping, R. r. (1856), Dears. 647 . . 1169, 

1176 
Torpev, R. r. (1871), 12 Cox, 45 . . 81, 82 
Toshack, R. p. (1849), 1 Pen. 492 . . 708 
Tottenham, R. r. (1835), 7 C. A P. 

237 . . G63 
Towers, R. r. (1874), 12 Cox, 580 . . 785 
Towle, R. r. (181G), R. A R. 314 . . 15, 

91 1299 
Toirnlev, R. r. (1746), 18 St. Tr.' 

1329 . . 988, 940 

(1863), 3 F. A F. 

839 . . 27 

(1871), L.R. 1C.C. 

R. 315 . . 437, 438, 469 
Townsend, R. r. (1841), C. A Mar. 

178.. 344, 510 

(1846), 1 Den. 167 562 

• (1866),10Cox,356 1045, 

1048 
Townshend, R. r. (1780), 2 Doug. 

421.. 1229 

(1884), 15 Cox, 

466.. 584 

(1896), 28 Nova 

Scotia, 468 . . 99 
Train, R. r. (1862), 2 B. A S. 640 . .1185, 

1216 
Trainer, R. r. (1864), 4F.4 F. 105 802 
Trafford, R. p. (1831), 1 B. A Ad. 

874 . . 86 
Tranter (Reason A), R. r. (1722), 16 

St. Tr. 1 . . 824, 798 
Trapabaw, R. v. (1786), 1 Leach, 427 630 
Travers, R. r. (1726), 2 Str. 700 .. 888 
Treadgotd, R. p. (1879), 48 L. J. 

(M. CO 102 . . 559, 672 
Trebilcock, R. 9. (1858), Dears. A B. 

463 . . 277, 441 
Treble, R. r. (1810), R. A R. 164 . . 713 
Tregoning, R. p. (1899). 63 J. P. 584 1075 
Treharne, R. r. (1831), 1 Mood. 298 297 
Tremearne, R. v. (1824), Ry. A M. 

147 . . 122 

(1826), 5 B.AC 

254 . . 204, 214, 292 

(1826), 5 B. & C. 

761 . . 1057 
Trenfield, R. r. (1858), 1 F. A F. 48 718 
Trevelli, R. p. (1882), 15 Cox. 289 212 
Trevenner, R. r. (1843), 2 M. A Rob. 

476.. 483 
Trilloc, R. r. (1842), C. A Mar. 650 786 
Tristram, R. v. (1898), 2 Q. B. 871 1208 
Trist v. Johnson (1883), 1 M. A Rob. 

269.. 816 
Trollope p. London Building Trades 

Federation (1893), 72 L. T. 342 1161 
Tromant?. Hodkinson (1903), 1 K. B. 

80.. 1204 
Trowter, R. p. (1722), 1 East, P. C. 

856 . . 824 
Truemao, R. v. (1889), 8 C. A P. 727 89 
Truman, R. t. (1795), 1 East, P. C. 

470.. 1173 
(1847), 2 Cox, 806 .. 662 



PAG I 

Truscott r. Carpenter (1697), 1 Ld. 

Raym. 229 . . 838 
Trusty, R. p. (1783), 1 East, P. C. 

418.. 531 
Tryddyn, R. r. (1852), 21 L. J. 

(M. C) 108 . . 1232 
Tucker, R. r. (1767), 4 Burr. 2046 . . 120 

(1826), 1 Mood. 134.. 535, 

536 

(1844), 1 Cox, 73 . . 682, 633 

(1876), 2 Q. B. D. 

417. 1195 
Tucket (Ross), R. r. (1844), 1 Coxj 

103 28 

Tuckwell, R. r. (1841), C. A Mar! 

215.. 13 
Toffin, R. r. (1903). M. S. . .89, 1307 

Tullay p. Reed (1828), 1 CAP. 6.. 839 
Tulley r. Corrie (1867), 10 Cox, 640 848 
Tunbridge, R. r. (1822), 1 St. Tr. 

(N. S.) 1368 . . 1023 
Turberfield, R. r. (1864), L. <fc C. 

495 306 

Turberrille, R. r. (1849), 4 Cox. 13 736 

Turner v. Pearte (1787), I T. R. 717 387 

— R. r. (1664), 1 Sid. 171 . . 635 

(«»«?<.), Comb. 407, 

408, tit. . . 796 

(1784), 1 Leach, 806 . . 630 

( 1790), 1 Leach, 686 . . 59 

(1811), 13 East, 228 . . 1280 

(1812), 15 East, 570 . . 137 

(1824), 3 B. & C. 160 . . 137 

(1829), 1 Mood. 239 . . 79 

Turner (Reader A), R. v. (1830), 4 

CAP. 245.. 651, 662 
Turner, R. r. (1882), 1 Mood. 347 . . 888, 

550 

(1838), 2 Mood. 42 . . 966, 

967 

(1839), 2 M. A Rob. 

214 . . 35 

(1889), 8 C A P. 755 825 

(1848), 2 C A K. 782 360, 

864 

(1849), 8 Cox, 804 . . 1248, 

1249 
(1864), 4 F. A F. 339 790 

(1870), 11 Cox, 661 .. 565 

(1872), 12 Cox, 818.. 1265 

(1889), 24 L. J. N. 

466, 469, 479 . . 125, 148, 

186 

(19W), 1 K. B. 181 . . 227, 

1147 
Turptn, R. v. (1849), 2 C. A K. 820 730, 

733 
Turton, R. f>. (1854), 6 Cox, 886 . . 184 
Turweeton, R. r. (1850), 16 Q. B. 

109.. 1221 
Tutchin, R. p. (1704), 14 St. Tr. 

1095.. 990, 992 
Twisletoo, R. p. (1668), 1 Lev. 267 902 
Twose, R. p. (1879), 14 Cox, 327 . . 34, 663 
Two Sicilies (King) r. Willcox 

(1850), 19 L. J. (Ch.) 488 . . 953 



Table of Cases. 



cxix 



PAGE 

Twyn, R. r. (1663), 6 St. Tr. 518 . . 989, 

940 
Twyning, R. p. (1819), 2 B. A Aid. 

386 . . 842, 1179 
Tyers, R. 9. (1819), R. * R. 402 . . 560 
Trier, R. p. (1823), I C. A P. 129 . . 332 

(1835), 1 Mood. 428 . . 1117 

(1838), 8C. &P. 616.. 15, 

30, 1300 

(1891), 2 Q. B. 588 .. 11 

Tylnev, R. r. (1848), 1 Den. 319 . . 401, 

725 
Tyauw, R. r. (1870), 11 Cox, 645 . . 1060 
TNrree, R. r. (1869), LK.lG.aR. 

177 . . 276, 563 
Tyrrell, R, p. (1894), 1 Q. B. 710 . . 917 
Tyrie, R. p. (1782), 21 St. Tr. 815 . . 946 
Tyson, R. r. (1867), L. R. 1 C. C. R. 

107 . . 1048 



UEZELL, R. p. (1851), 2 Deo. 274 1247, 

1249 
Ulfee, lit (1886), 54 L. T. 286 . . 1178 
Ulmer, R. p. (1850), 4 Cox, 444 . . 369 
United Kingdom Electric Telegraph 
Co., R. p. (1862), 31 L. J. (M.C.) 

166 . . 1216 
United States v. Hamilton (1816), 

1 Mason (U. 8.), 152.. 40 
United States r. Perez (1824), 9 

Wheaton, 579.. 224 
Unvin, R. r. (1839), 7 Dowl. Pr. 

Cas.578.. 132 
Upchurch, R. 9. (1836), 1 Mood. 

465.. 383 
Unfold p. Lett (1804), 5 Ssp. 100 . . 740 
Uptngton p. Solomon (1879), 9 Bu- 
chanan Cape Sop. Ct. 240 . . 781 11 
Upton, R. r. (1851), 5 Cox, 298 .. 689 
Upton St. Leonards, R. p. (1847), 

10 Q. B. 827 . . 145, 377 
Upton-on-Serern, R. p. (1833), 6 C. 

A P. 133 . . 1222 
U»ill r. Brearley (1878), 3 C. P. D. 

206.. 996 
- r. Hales (1878), 3 C. P. D. 319 996 



YAGLIANO'S Case (1891), App. 

Cas. 107 . . 790 
Ysiliant r. Dodemead (1743), 2 Atk. 

524 401 
Vsller, R. r. (1844), 1 Cox, 84 .' ! 765 
Yamplew, R. p. (1862), 8 F. A F. 

520.. 22, 788 
Van Batchell, R. r. (1829), 3 C. k P. 

629 . . 321, 787 
VsUancey p. Fletcher (1897), 1 Q. B. 

265.. 1025 
Vandercomb, R. r. (1796), 2 Leach, 

708 . . 170, 173, 174, 635 
Vanderstein, R. r. (1865), 10 Cox, 

177 (/r.) . , 735 



PAGE 

Vane (Sir H.), R. p. (1662), 6 St. Tr. 

119 . . 30, 44, 67, 290, 938, 940 
Van Muyen, R. p. (1806), R. A R. 

118.. 441 
Vann, R. p. (1851), 2 Den. 325 . . 1183, 

1207 
Van Omeron r. Dowick (1809), 2 

Camp. 42 . . 351 
Vsntaudillo, R, p. (1815), 4 M. t 

Sel. 73 . . 1183 
Varley, R. p. (1771), 2 W. BL 682 . . 964 
Vaughan p. Martin (1796), 1 Esp. 

440,. 418 

— R. p. (1696), 13 St. Tr. 485 337, 

408, 414, 544, 931, 941, 

943, 946, 947 

(1769), 4 Borr. 2494 145, 

1080, 1081, 1278 

(1838), 8 C. & P. 276 712, 

740 
Vanttn, Re (1899), 2 Q. B. 549 . . 270 
Vaux's Case (1590), 4 Co. Rep. 445 12, 

172, 174, 226 
Vegelahn p. Gontner (1896), 167 

Mass. 92 . . 1161 
Velthasen p. Ormshy (1789), 8 T. R. 

315 540 
Verelst, R. p. (1813), 3 Camp. 482 ! .' 344, 

1065 
Villenenve, R. p. (1778), 8 T. R. 104 598 
Villensky, R. p. (1892), 2 Q. B. 597 558 
Vilmont p. Bentley. See Bentley 

p. Vilmont. 
Vincent, R. p. (1839), 9 C. A P. 91 414, 

1098, 1106 

(1840), 9 C 4 P. 275 1288 

(1852), 2 Den. 464 . . 59, 

297 
Vint, R. p. (1801), 27 St. Tr. 627 . . 143, 

1128 
Virrier, R. r. (1840), 12 A. 4 E. 817 222, 

1056, 1064 
Vivian, R. p. (1844), 1 Den. 85 . . 736 
Vizetelly r. Mudies, Ltd. (1900), 1 

Q. B. 170.. 1130, 1131 
Vodden, R. p. (1853), Dears. 229 . . 222 
Voke, R. p. (1823), K. & R. 531. .810, 816 
Von Seberg, R. p. See Seberg. 
Vos, R. p. (1895), 6 Queensland L. J. 

215 . . 348, 892 
Vowchnrch, R. p. (1846), 2 C. & K. 

893.. 1234 
Vreones, R. p. (1891), 1 Q. B. 860 . . 2, 

619, 620, 1071 

Vyse, R. p. (1839), 1 Mood. 218 . . 502 

(1862), 8 F. & F. 247 . . 28 



WADDINGTON r. Cousins (1886), 

7 C. & P. 595 . . 383n 

— R. p. (1771), 2 

East, P. C. 513 67, 
623 

— (1800), 1 East, 

167 . . 131 



ozz 



Table of Can*. 



PAGE 

Waddington, H. r. (1800), 1 East, 

143.. 226 

(1822), 1 St 

Tr. (X. S.) 
1839.. 143, 145, 
1020, 1022 
Wade v. Broughton (1814), 3 V. ft 

B. 172.. 3, 1279 
— K. v. (1825), 1 Mood. 86 .. 224, 389 

(1831), 1 B. ft Ad. 861 . . 70, 74 

(1869), 11 Cox, 549 .. 440 

Wadsworth, R. r. (1694), 5 Mod. 13 121 

(1867), 10 Cox, 

557 . . 444 
Wagstaff, R. r. (1819), R.AK. 398 532 
Wagstaffe, R. r. (1868), 10 Cox, 530 804n 
Wainwright, R. r. (1875), 13 Cox, 

171.. 211, 319,422 
Waite, R. r. (1742), 1 Leach, 28 . . 462 

(1743), 1 Wils. 22 . . 146 

(1892), 2 Q. B. 600 . . 22, 23, 

908, 911, 916 
WakefiY.d (Gibbon), R. r. (1827), 

2 Lewin, 279 . . 387. 398, 

1169 

— (Mayor, etc.), R. r. ( 1887>, 

20 Q. B. D. 810.'. 1213 

— R. r. (1827), 2 Lewin, I . . 1279 
Wakcdeld's Case (1736), Cas. (K. B.) 

tttnp. llardw. 313 . . 413 
Wakeling, R. r. (1823), R. ft R. 

504.. 600 
Wakeman r. Robinson (1823), 1 

Bing. 213 . . 836 
Wakley r. Cooke (1847-9), 16 M. ft 

W. 822 . . 152, 155 
Walcot, R. v. (1696), 1 Eng. Rep. 87 933 
Waldegrave Peerage Claim (1837), 

4 CI. ft F. 649.. 1174 
Walden r. Uolman (1704), 6 Mod. 

115.. 55 
Waldo, R. r. (1903), 67 J. P. Rep. 

108 . . 192 
Waldridger. Kennison (1794), 1 Esp. 

143.. 383 
Waldron r. Coombe (1810), 8 Taunt. 

162.. 855 

— R. r. (1896), 18 Cox, 373 112, 

247 
Walford, R. r. (1803), 5 Esp. 62 . . 479 

( 1839), 8 C. ft P. 767 876 

(1899), 34 L. J. N. 

116.. 816, 827 
Walkden, R. r. (1845), 1 Cox, 282 . . 835, 

Walker r. Baird (1892), App. Cas. 

491.. 351 

— r. Beauchamp (Countess) 

(1834), 6 C. ft P. 552 353 

— r. Brewster (1867), L. R. 5 

Eq. 25.. 1184, 1216 

— r. London (Mayor) (1869), 

L. R. 4 Q. B. 371 . . 265, 269 

— r. Matthews ( 18S1 ) , 8 Q. B. 

I). 109 . . 269 

— R. r. (1599), 4 Co. Rep. 41a 72 



PAGt 

Walker, R. r. (1778), 1 Leach, 97 .. 1030 

(1799), 3 Esp. 21 . . 1133 

(1812), 3 Camp. 264 . .SOlit, 

1305 

(1824), 1 C. ft P. 320 800, 

801 

(1827), 1 Mood. 155 . . 436, 

494 

(1834), 6 C. ft P. 657 596 

(1843), 8 C. ft P. 446 177, 

819 

(1854), Dear*. 358 .. 808 

Walker r. R, (1857), 8 E. ft B. 439 1066 

— R.r. (1858), Dears, ft R 600 666 

(1859), 1 F. ft F. 534 370 

(1875), L. R. 10 Q. B. 

355.. 5 

(1901), 65 J. P. 72 . . 268 

Walker, Exparte (1889), 22Q. B. D. 

384 . . 1271 
Walklev, R. r. (1833), 6 C. ft P. 175 331 
Wall r.'Macnaniara (1779), 1 T. R. 

586, cit... 896 
— R. r. (1800), 2 East, P. C. 953 717, 

725 

(1802), 28 St Tr. 51 . . 781, 

795, 796 
Wallace, R. r. ( 1841 ), C. ft Mar. 200 46, 

659, 661, 1305 

(1866), 10 Cox, 500 361 

(1898), 19 N. S. W. 

Rep. (Law) 166 . . 324 
Wallace r. Hardacre (1807), 1 Camp. 

46 . . 1089a 
Waller r. Loch (1881), 7 Q. B. D. 

619.. 1132 
Wallingford r. Mutual Benefit 

Society (1880), 5 App. Cas. 686 1207 
Wallis r. Delancev (1790), 7 T. R. 

266n.. 381 
— R. r. (1703), 1 Salk. 384 . . 15 

(1832), 1 Blood. 344 . . 654 

Walls, R. r. (1846), 2 C. ft K. 214 . . 524 
Walne, R. r. (1870), 11 Cox, 647 . . 604 
Walsby r. Anley (1861), 30 L. J. (M. 

C.) 121.. 1158 
Walsh, R. r. (1812), R. ft R. 216 . . 462, 

501 

(1824), 1 Mood. 14 . . 463 

Walshc, R. p. (1876), Ir. Rep. 10 C. 

;L. 511.. 1114 
Walter, R. v. (1799), 8 Esp. 21 . . 993 
Walter* r. Green (1899), 2 Ch. 696 1162 
r. Mace (1819), 2 B. ft Aid. 

756 . . 303, 998 

— R. r. (1688), 12 St Tr. 113 789 

(1824), 1 Mood. 13 .. 646 

(1836), 5 C. ft P. 138 1144 

(1841), C. ft Mar. 164 784 

(1842), C. ft Mar. 688 738 

Walton, R. r. (1862), L. ft C. 288 . . 533, 

535 
Wandsworth. R. r. (1817), 1 B. ft 

Aid. 63.. 292 
Warburton, R. r. (1871), L. R. 1 V. 

C. R. 274.. 1279, 1281 



Table of Oaaes. 



cxxi 



Ward, R. r. (1727), 2 Sir. 747 



PAGE 
.. 619, 

702,704 

(1884), 6C A P. 368.. 362, 

366, 1062, 1065 

(1886), 4 A. 4 E. 384 1184, 

1219 

(1848), 2C.4K.769.. 415 

(I860), 2 F. A F. 19 . . 89 

( 1864), 10 Cox, 42 .. 88, 11 17 

(1867), 10 Cox, 573 ..' 213, 

224 

(1871), L. R. 1 C. C. R. 

356.. 817, 844 
Wud, Re (1861), 30 L. J. (Ch.) 

7*5.. 158 

— r. Lloyd (1843), 6 M. 4 G. 

785.. 1090* 

— r. Lloyd (1848), 7 Scott, 

(N. R.) 499 . . 264 

— r. Wells(t809), lTannt.461 881 
Wardell r. Fennor (1809), 2 Camp. 

282.. 381 

— R. r. (1862), 3F.4tF.82.. 737 

{1997), 9 Queensland 

L.J. 49.. 200 

Wardle, B. r. (1800), R. 4k R. 9 . . 305 

(1842), C. 4 Mar. 647 214 

Waidroper, R. v. ( 1860), Bell, 249 . . 32 

Waring, R. v. (1899), 63 J. P. 788 . . 1225 

Wannan, R. t». (1846), 1 Den. 188 . . 841 

Warner, R. 9. (1833), 1 Mood. 380.. 809 

Wane, R. r. (1725), 2 Str. 698 . . 98 
Warren r. Anderson (1839), 8 800U, 

— R. r. (1820), R. 4 R. 48* ! ! 1088 

(1882), 3 Rosa. Cr. 

(6th ed.) 230 907 

(1884), 1 Cox, 68 . . 656 

(1865), 10 Cox, 359 .. 466 

Warren r. Warren (1834), 1 Cr. M. 

4 R. 250.. 992, 1130 
Warriekshall, R. r. (1783), 1 Leach, 

268.. 836 
Warrioer 0. Giles (1720), 2 Str. 954 357 
Warringhatn, R. r. (1851), 2 Pen. 

447*... 331, 333 
Waiter r. Waxter (1890), 15 P. D. 

152.. 1175 
Warahaner, R. r. (1836), I Mood. 

466.. 77, 79, 717, 765 
Wartaa.br, R. r. (1835), 2A.AE. 

435.. 132 
Warwick (Lord), R. r. (1699), 13 St. 

Tr. 939, 1015 . . 178 
Waaon, Ex parte (1869), L. R. 4 

Q. B. 573.. 8 

— r. Walter (1869), L. R. 4 

Q. B. 73.. 995, 996 

Waterage, R. r. (1846), 1 Cox, 338 826 

Water*, IS. r. (1834), 6 C. 4 P. 828 802 

- — (1835), 1 Mood. 457 . . 56 

(1848), 1 Den. 356 . .57, 67 

78 783 

(I860), 8 Cox, 350 . . ' 249 

(1873), 12 Cox, 390. . 1037 

Waikiaa, R.r. (1841), C* Mar. 264 623 



I 



PA<iK 

Watktnaon, R. r. (1725), 2 Str. 1122 402 

(1872), 12 Cox, 271 70, 

1142, 1146 
Wataon r. Christie (1800), 2 B. A P. 

224.. 837 

— R. r. (1705), 2 Ld. Raym. 

856 .. 1186, 1227 

(1757), lWils.(K.B.) 

41 . . 148, 1279 
(1788), 2T. R.199.. 146, 

148, 1096, 1129 
• (1793), 2 Leach, 640 451 

(1808), 1 Camp, 215.. 44, 

992 

(1817),82St.Tr.l.. 806, 

839, 402, 404, 405, 417, 
420, 939, 940 

(1821), R. 4 R. 468 . . 1042 

(1834), 6 C. 4 P. 653 416, 

424 

(1847), 2 Cox, 876 . . 1188 

(1357), Dears. 4 B. 

348.. 601,614 
Watts, R. r. (1704), 1 Salk. 357 . . 1186, 

1227 

(1798), 2 Esp. 675 . . 1219 

(1821), R. 4 R. 436 . . 713, 

714 

(1826), 2 C. 4 P. 486 1183 

(1829), M. 4 M. 281 . . 1184 

(1850), 2 Den. 14 . . 466, 

568,571 

(1854), Dears. 326 .. 437 

(1868), L. 4 C. 339 . . 372 

Waodby, R. r. (1895), 2 Q. B. 482 16, 

840 844 
Wavell, R. 0. (1829), 1 Mood. 224 .. ' 612 
Waverton, R. r. (1861), 17 Q. B. 662 73 
Wavertree, R. r. (1841), 2 M. 4 

Rob. 353.. 1228 
Wealand, R. p. (1887), 20 Q. B. D. 

827 . . 916 
Weale, R. r. (1881), 5 C. 4 P. 135 476 
Weatherston r. Hawkins (1786), 1 

T. K. 110.. 1132 
Weaver r. Bosh (1798), 8 T. R. 78 838 

— r. Ward (1627), Hob. 134. . 836 

— R. p. ( 1873), L. R. 2 C. C. R. 

85 . . 353, 379, 916, 917 
Webb e. Beavan (1883), U Q. B. D. 

609.. 1127 
— R. r. (1722), 2 8tr. 1068 . . 131 

(1764), 3 Burr. 1468 . . 121 

(1811), 14 East, 406 . . 148 

(1819), 1 Stark. Ev. 

(3rd ed.) 189.. 414 

(1829), 3 B. 4 B. 228 . . 718 

(1884), 6 C. 4 P. 695 . . 391 

(1834), 1 M. 4 Rob. 405 788 

(1836), 1 Mood. 431 . . 441, 482 

(1848), 1 Den. 338 .. 275, 276, 

1188, 1189 

(1865), 4 F. 4 F. 862.. 209 

(1867), II Cox, 138 .. 390 

(1893), 9 T. L. R. 199 . . 564, 

688 



cxxii 



Table of Casts. 



PAOE 

Webb, R. r. (1904), Cent Crim. Ct. 7, 

676, 887 

Webster, R. r. (1789), 3 T. R.388 . . 147, 

149, 150 

(1859), Bell, 154 . . 1056 

(1859), 8 Cox, 187 . . 1061 

(1861), L. AC. 77.. 62, 

296 444 

(1885), 16 Q. B. D. ' 

134.. 914 
Wedderburne, R. r. (1746), 18 St. 

Tr. 425 ; Fort. 9 . . 224, 806, 940, 941 
Wedge, R. r. (1832), 6 C. 4 P. 298 916, 

917 
Weekes, R. r. (1866), 10 Cox, 224 . . 459 
Weeks, R. r. (1861), L. & C. 18. . 310, 

983 
Wegener, R. r. (1817), 2 Stark. (N. 

P.) 245.. 1123, 1129 
Weinberg, R. r. (1898), 83 L. J. N. 

289.. 854, 1172 
Weir, R. r. (1828), 1 B. 4 C. 288 . . 807 
Welbourn, R. r. (1792), 1 East, P. C. 

358, 860 . . 821, 322 
Welch, R. r. (1846), 1 Den. 199 . . 561, 

562, 572 

(1851), 2 Den. 78 . . 975 

(1875),1Q.B.D.23.. 651, 

693, 701 
Weld t>. Hornby (1806), 7 East, 195 1184 
Welland, R. r. (1822), R. A R. 494 469 
Wellard, R. r. (1881), 14 Q. B. D. 63 1188 
Wellings, R. r. (1824), 1 C. 4 P. 

315,454,457.. 561 

(1878), 3 Q. B. D. 

426.. 370 
Wellock r. Constantine (1863), 2 

H. A C. 146 . . 265 
Wells r. Abrahams (1872), L. R. 7 

Q. B. 554 . . 264, 265 
- R. r. (1829), M. A M. 326 . . 391 

(1858), 1 F. A F. 109 . . 457 

Welman, R. r. (1858), Dears. 188 . . 608 
Welsh, R. r. (1785), 1 Leach, 864 . . 964 

(1827), 1 Mood. 175 43, 171 

- (1828),MS. : Car. Supp. 

56 . . 173 

(1869), 11 Cox, 836 . . 792, 

794 
Weltje, R. r. (1809), 2 Camp. 142 . . 1095, 

1097 
Welton, R. r. (1862), 9 Cox, 297 

297,369 
Wemyss r. Hopkins (1875), L. R. 10 

Q. B. 878 . . 170, 174 
Wenboro, R. r. (1842), 6 Jar. 267 . . 213 
Wenham, R. r. (1866), 10 Cox, 222 855, 

611 
Wenmouth, R. r. (1860), 8 Cox, 348 622, 

641 
Wennall r. Adney (1802), 8 B. A P. 

247 . . 2, 878 
Went, R. r. (1818), R. A R. 859 . . 63 
Wentworth (Lord), R. r. (1659), 4 

St. Tr. 314.. 946 
Wesley, R. r. (1869), 1 F. A F. 528 809 



I 



pAoa 
West, R. r. (1831), 2 Deacon, C. L. 

1518.. 676 

(I847),i 1 Den. 258.. 737, 

739 

(1848), 2 C. A K. 784.. 785 

(1854), Dean. 402 .. 446 

(1856), Dean. A B. 109 77 

(1858), Dean. A B. 575 600 

(1898), 1 Q. B. 174 . . 96, 

913, 918 
Westbeer, R. r. (1739), 2 Str. 1133; 

1 Leach, 12 . . 220, 890, 436 
Westbnry r. Powel (tncert.), Oro. 

Eliz. 664, cct. . . 6 
Western, R. r. (1868), L. R. 1 C. C. 

R. 122.. 297, 1048,1060 
West Ham Guardians r. Bethnal 
Green Guardians (1896), App. 

Cas. 477.. 290 
Westlcy, R. r. (1859), Bell, 193 . . 74, 80, 

296, 806, 1068, 1060 

(1868), 11 Cox. 139 177 

West Mark, R. r. (1840), 2 M. A Rob. 

805.. 1228, 1229 
Weston, R. r. (1724), 1 Str. 623 . . 86, 120 

(1770), 4 Bnrr. 2607. . 86, 

1222, 1226 

(1879), 14 Cox, 346 211, 

797, 805 
Westeopp, R. r. (1851), 2 Ir. C. L. 

Rep. 217.. 1114 
Westwood, R. r. (1822), R. A R. 

495.. 626, 646 
WethereU, R. r. (1819), R. A R. 381 102, 

128 
Wetherston v. Edgington (1809), 2 

Camp. 94 . . 382 
Whalley, R. r. (1847), 2 C. A K. 376 213 

(1849), 19 L. J. 

(Q. B.)14.. 169 
Whalley's Case (1874), L. R. 9 Q. B. 

219 . . 1078, 1096 
Whateley, R. r. (1829), 4 Man. A 

Ry. 431.. 147 
Wharton (Dnke of), R. r. (1728) . . 946 
— Peerage Case (1844), 12 

CI. A F. 296.. 36d 
Wheater, R. r. (1838), 2 Mood. 45, 

61 . . 828, 329 
Wheatland, R. r. (1838), 8 C. A P. 

238.. 408, 1066,1061 
Wheatly, R. r. (1761), 2 Bnrr. 1125 619 
Wheeldoo, R. r. (1839), 8 C. A P. 

747.. 636 
Wheeler, R. r. (1829), 3 C. A P. 685 638 

(1835), 7 C. A P. 170 90, 

470 

(1852), Cent. Crim. 

Ct.. 184 

(1866), 14 W. R. 848 

(/r.).. 570 
Whelan, R. r. (1881), 14 Cox, 596 

(/r.).. 416 
Wheeley, R. r. (1888), 8 C. A P. 250 327 
Wheeling, R. r. (1789), 1 Leach, 

311m.. 386 



TdNe of Cam. 



exxiii 



PAGE I 

Whiley, R. r. (1804), 2 Leach, 988 811, 

975 

(1805), R. 4 R. 90 . . 714, 

719, 720 

(1840), 1 C. 4 K. 150 48, 

860, 1168 
WhiUker r. Pomfret (1902), 1 K. B. 

661 . . 1166 

- r. Wisbey (1852), 6 Cox, 

109 . . 218, 281 
Whitchurch, R. v. (1890), 24 Q. B. D. 

420 .. 828, 1278 
Whiteomb, R. r. (1828), 1 C. 4 P. 

124 . • 1085 
While r. Garden (1851), 10 C. B. 

919,927.. 456 

- r. McKiel (1889), 28 New 

Brunswick, 89 . . 266* 

- r. Parkin (1810), 12 East, 

578.. 386 

- r. Spettigne (1845), 10 M. 4 

W. 608 .. 264, 269, 1091 

- R. r. (1767), 1 Burr. 833 . . 1182, 

1188, 1184 

(1782), Cald. 188 . . 1088 

(1788), 1 Leach, 252 . . 628, 

643 

(1786), 1 Leach, 430 4 

ft (a).. 889,406 

(1800), 1 Phil. Ev. (7th 

ed.)406.. 885 

(1806), R. 4 R. 99 .. 14 

(1808), 80 St. Tr. 1131 146, 

1095, 1096 

(1811), 8 Camp. 98 .. 209 

(1828), R. 4 R. 508 . . 338 

(1829), M. 4 M. 271 . . 1044, 

1064 
(1889),8C.4P.742.. 665 

(1840), 9 C. 4 P. 282 . . 788 

(1840), 9C.4P.344.. 462 

(1847), 1 Den. 208 . . 703, 

712, 714, 730, 781 
(1858), Dears. 208 .. 439 

(1860), 8 E. 4 E. 137.. 155 

(1865), 4 F. 4 F. 388, 

884 . . 815, 843 

(1871), L. R. 1C.C.R. 

_ 311.. 876 

White r. R. (1876), 13 Cox, 318 (/r.) 72, 

1285,1290 
Whitehead. R. r. (1693), 1 Salk. 871 88 

(1824), 1 C. 4 P. 

67 . . 1288 

(1848), 3 C. 4 K. 

202.. 788 

(1866), L. R. 1 C. 

C. R. 88 . . 277, 887, 388 

Whitehead r. R. (1845), 7 Q. B. 582 94 
Whitehouse, R. r. (1848), 8 Cox, 

86.. 1056 

(1852), Dears. 1 291, 

294 

(1852), 6 Cox, 88, 

45.. 1280, 1288, 1286, 
1290 



PAOI 



Whitehouse, R. r. (1852), 6 Cox, 

129 . . 1280, 1290 



(1895), 6ii*iOTzaH>- 

land L. J. 218 . . 66« 
Whiteley, R. r. (1829), 1 Lewin, 178 789, 

790 
Whitelocke r. Musgrove (1888), 1 

Cr. 4 M. 611 . . 882 
Whiteman, R. r. (1854), Dears. 858 484, 

696 
Whitfield, R. v. (I860), 8 C. 4 K. 

121.. 184 
•- r. S. E. R. (1868), E. B. 

4E. 115.. 11 
Whithoroe, R. t». (1828), 8 C. 4 P. 

Wnitmore r. Fairley (1881), 45 L. T. 

99.. 1089» 
Whiting, R. *. (1837), 7 C. 4 P. 77 421 
Whitmarsb, R. r. (1898), 62 J. P. 

680, 711.. 322, 824, 798 

Whitaer, R. r. (1824), 1 Mood. 8 . . 698 

-^— (1835),7C.4P.208 1224, 

1228, 1229, 1236 
Whitteker, R. v. (1848), 1 Den. 810 1249 

(1859), 2 F. 4 F. 1 108 

Whittingham, R. r. (1801), 2 Leach, 

912.. 669 

(1840), 9 C. 4 

P. 284.. 678 
Whitworth, R. r. (1858), 1 F. 4 F. 

882.. 322 
Whybrow, R. v. (1861), 8 Cox, 488 1067 
Mbyte, R. v. (1851), 6 Cox, 290 . . 714 
Wicker, R. v. (1854), 18 Jur. 252 . . 869 
Wickes, R. r. (1809), R. 4 R. 149 . . 780 
Wickham, R. v. (1839), 10 A. 4 E. 

34.. 605, 610 

- Ex parte (1894), 10 T. L. 

R. 226.. 764 
Widdop, R. r. (1872), L. R. 2 C. C. R. 

3 328 
Wigg, R. r. (1706), 2 Salk. 460..' 4, 122 
Wiggs, R. v. (1785), 1 Leach, 878n 796 
Wiggins, R. r. (1867), 10 Cox, 562 416 
Wight, R. r. (1895), 59 J. P. 746 . . 159 
Wiben r. Law (1821), 3 Stark. (N. P.) 

68 853 
Wilbain, R. p. (1864), 9 Cox, 448 

(/r.).. 383 
Wilcock, R. r. (1808), 2 Rnss. Cr. 

(6th ed.) 706, 905.. 723 
Wilcox, R. r. (1808), R. 4 R. 50. . 708, 

704, 711 
Wild, R. r. (1835), 1 Mood. 452.. 22, 

884 

(1887), 2 Lewin, 214 . . 797 

Wildman, R. r. (1872), 12 Cox, 854 102, 

128 
Wiler, R. r. (1850), 2 Den. 87 . . 550 
Wilford, R. v. (1823), R. 4 R. 617 . . 60, 

628 
Wilkes, R. r. (1770), 4 Burr. 2527 110, 

142, 148, 168, 281, 282, 
282, 283, 1190, 1198 

(1836), 7 C. 4 P. 272 391 



cxxnr 



Table of Casts. 



I 



I'AGK 

Wilkes v. Hungerford Market Co. 

2 Bin*. (X. C)281.. 1180 
Wilkins, R. r. (1789), 2 East, P. C 

578.. 455 

- (1789), 1 Leach, 520 . . 59, 

60 

(1888), 1 Dowl. 586 190, 

191 

(1861), L. A C. 89 . . 848, 

849 
Wilkins, Ex parte (1895), G4 L. J. 

(M. C.) 123 . . 1162 
Wilkinson, R. r. (1598), 1 Hale, 508 464 

(1821), R. A R. 470 59, 

444 

(1842), 2 M. A Rob. 

481.. 1088 

(1867), 10 Cox, 537 573 

Wilks, R. r. (1767), 2 East, P. C. 

967.. 718 

(1837), 7 CAP. 811.. 1248 

(1855), 5 E. 4 B. 690.. 131 

Witlace, R. t. (1797), 1 East, P. C 

186 . . 97 

WMett, R. r. (1796), 6 T. R. 294 . . 160 

Willcox, R. r. (1889), 37 W. R. 686 1315 
Williams r. Bayley (1866), L. R. 1 

H. L. 200 . . 1090m, 1309 

— r. Burgess (1840), 12 A. A 

E. 635 . . 97 

— r. Glenister (1824), 2 B. A 

C 699 . . 1026 
~ r. H. E. I. Co. (1802), 3 

Easi,192..2, 315, 1186 
r. Jones (1736), 2 Str. 

1049.. 838 

— r. Quebrada Rail. Co. 

(1895), 2 Ch. 751 . . 401 

— r. Williams (1882), 20 Ch. 

D. 659 . . 1207 

— R. r. (1639), 1 Hale, 522 629 

(1712), 1 Salk. 884 31, 

1197 

(1757), 1 Burr. 385 162 

(1762), 8 Burr. 1317 147 

(1775), 1 Leach, 114 735 

(Rhenwick) (1790), 

1 Leach, 533 . . 232, 851 

( 1797), 26 St Tr. 653 1022 

(1810), 2 Camp. 506 44, 

992, 1115 

(1811), 2 Camp. 646 304, 

998 

(1822), 5 B. A Aid. 

595 . . 146, 150, 991 

(1823), 2 L. J. (O. 

S.) K. B. 80 . . 146. 1095 

• (1824), 4 Man. A Ry. 

471.. 1112, 1113 

: (1825), 1 Mood. 107 76, 

469, 470 

(1833), 1 Mood. 387 808 

(1884), 6 CAP. 390 453 

(1834). 6 C A P. 626 578 

(1886), 7 C A P. 298 66, 

300 



tack 
Williams, R. r. ( 1836), 7 C A P. 32u 388 

(1836),7CAP.354 610 

(1838), 8 CAP. 284 399 

(1838), 8C A P. 286 909 

(1838), 8 C A P. 484 887, 

715, 726 

(1842), C. A Mar. 269 706, 

960, 976, 980 
(1843), 1C.AK. 195 468 

(1844), 1 Den. 39. . 12,818 

(1845), 1 Cox, 289 . . 394a 

Williams r. R. ( 1845), 7 Q. B. 250 . . 4 

- R. r. (1846), 2 C A K. 61 732 

(1848), 6 St. Tr. 

(N. S.) 776. .1099, 1101 

( 1850), 1 Den. 529 .. 1088 

(I860), 2 Den. 61 . . 276, 

712, 732, 735, 738 

(1853), 6 Cox, 843.. 418, 

422 

(1857), 7 Cox, 861.. 605 

(1862), 9 Cox, 838 

(/r.).. 696 

(1870), 18 W. R. 806 227, 

243 

(1871), 11 Cox, 684 824, 

826 

(1871), 12 Cox, 101 372 

(1878), 14 Cox, 69. . 1249 

( 1893), 1 Q. B. 320. .3, 28, 

908, 911, 916, 920, 1296 

(1898), 62 J. P. 810 600, 

922 

(1899), 19 Cox, 239 692 

Williamson, R. r. (1807), 8 C. A P. 

686.. 788 

(1820), 8 B. A 

Aid. 682.. 150 

(I860), 1 Cox, 87 802 

(1869), 11 Cox, 

828.. 601, 603 
Willis r. Maclachlan (1876), 1 Ex. 

D. 376.. 838 
— R. r. (1710), 16 SU Tr. 613 825, 

887 

(1833), 1 Mood. 875 . . 443 

(1845), 1 Den. 80 . . 67 

(1872), 12 Cox, 164 . . 1067 

WUlman r. Worrall (1838), 8 C. A 

P. 880. .381, 382 
698 

733 

793 



Willot, R. r. (1871), 12 Cox, 68 
Willoughby, R. r. (1783), 2 East, 

P. C 944 . . 

(1791), 1 East, 

P. C. 288 
Willoughby 's Case (1688),'Cro. Eli's! 

90 . • 5 
Wilmett, R. r. (1848), 3 Cox, 281 '. ! 1010 
Wiltshire, R. r. (1880), 6 Q. B. D. 

366. .842, 844, 1170, 1176, 1177 
W'ilahaw, R. r. (1841), C A Mar. 

146 . .871, 377 
Wilson r. Greaves (1757), 1 Burr. 

240.. 102:1 
— r. Hawaii (1792). 4T. R. 763 397, 

401 



Table of Case*. 



CXXY 



l'AGE 

Wilson r. Stewart (1863), 32 L. J. 

(M. C.) 198 1300 

— B. r. (1783), 1 Leach, 286 . . 964 

(1799), 8 T. R. 357 . . 1113 

(1806), R. & R. 115 . . 630 

(1834-5), 1 A. k E. 

627: 3 A. AE.817 1109, 

1113 

(1837), 8 C. & P. Ill 451 

(1838), 2 Hood. 52 . . 554 

(1839), 9 C. 4 P. 27 . . 569 

(1844), 6 Q. B. 620 .. 122 

(1847), 1 Den. 284 . . 714 

(1852), 18 Q. B. 348 . . 1223 

(1856), Dears, k B. 127 828 

(1856), Dears, k B. 157 340 

(1858), Dears. * B. 558 763 

(1861), 8 Cox, 458 .. 869 

(1862), 3 F. 4 F. 119 1170 

(1874), 12 Cox, 622 . . 248 

(1879), 5 Q. B. D. 28 23, 

122 1145 
Wilton, R. r. (1858), 1 F. k F. 309* 370 

(1858), 1 F. k F. 391 734, 

737 
Wilton (de), Re (1900), 2Ch. 481 . . 354 

1172, 1176 
Wilts, R. r. (1705), 6 Mod. 307 . . 1235, 

1238 
Wiltshire (Justices), R. v. (1863), 8 

L. T. (N. S.) 242 . . 1091 
Windhill Local Board r. Vint (1890), 

46 Ch. D. 351. .1089n, 1090a, 

1091, 1218 
Windsor, R. v. (1864), 4 F. k F. 361 333 

- Re (1865), 34 L. J. (M. C.) 

163.. 704 
Winglasd (Central), R. v. (1877), 2 

Q. B. D. 849 . . 1233 
Wink, R. r. (1834), 6 C. k P. 897 . . 819 
Winkworth (1830), 4 C. k P. 444 . . 625 
Wiaslow, R. r. (I860), 8 Cox, 897 309 
Wiasor r. R. (1865), LR.1Q. B. 

289, 390. .215, 222, 223, 225, 
282, 295, 391, 394n 
Winter r. Bancks (1901), 19 Cox, 

687.. 267 
- R. r. (1815), R. k R. 295 . . 654 
Winterbottom (1844), 1 Den. 41 . . 730 
Winteringham, R. *. (1716), 1 Str. 2 68 
Wintie, & (1870), L. B. 9 Eq. 878 358 
Winwkk, R. p. (1799), 8 T. R. 454 806 
Wiseman, R. r. (1716), Fortesc. 91 924 

(1902), 71 L. J. (K. 

B.)128.. 1144 
WiteheD, R. r. (1798), 2 East, P. C. 

830 . . 598 
Withal, R. r. (1773), 1 Leach, 88 '. ! 623, 

635 
Witham r. Lewis (1744), 1 Wils. 

(K. B.)48.. 295 
Withers, R. r. (1784), 1 East, P. C. 

233.. 798 

(1789). 3T. R. 428 . . 227 

(1831); 1 Mood. 294 841 

(1849), 4 Cox, 17 . . 121 



PAGE 

Withington L. B. r. Manchester 

(Mayor, etc.) (1893), 2 Ch. 19 . . 1185 
Witt, R. ?. (1829), 1 Mood. 248 . . 629 
— »• Witt (1863), S Sir. k Tr. 

143.. 320 
WoUaston v. Hake will (1841), 3 

Scott (X. R.), 693 . . 387 

- R. v. (1872), 12 Cox, 180 919, 

926 
Wollez, R. f. (1860), 8 Cox, 337 . . 268, 

269 
Wolstenholme, R. r. (1869), 11 Cox, 

313.. 673 
Womersley, R. r. (1836), 2 Lew in, 

162.. 261 
Wood, Ex parte, Re Borden (1888), 

21 Q. B. D. 24 . . 1137 

— r, Bowron (1866), L. R. 2 Q. 

B. 21.. 1158 

— r. Burgess (1890), 24 Q. B. 

D. 162.. 1152 

— r. Drury (1699), I Ld. Raym. 

734 . . 382 

— r. Veal (1822), 6 B. k Aid! 

454.. 1223 
R. r. (1796), 2 East, P. C. 

732 .. 466, 625 

( 1880), 1 Mood. 278.. 841 

(1831), 3 B. k Ad. 657 12(H) 

(1841), 5 Jnr. 225 .. 43 

(1856), Dears, k B. 1 1249 

(1859), 1 F. k F. 470 809, 

867 

(1877), 14 Cox, 46 . . 319 

Woodburn*s Case, R. v. (1722), 16 

St. Tr. 54 . . 789, 798, 842 
Woodcock r. Houlds worth (1846), 

16 M. AW. 124.. 511 
Woodcock, R. r. (1789), 1 Leach, 

500.. 321, 323, 324, 
372,398 

(1789), 2 Leach, 

563, cit. . . 398 
WoodfaU, R. tr. (1770), 5 Burr. 266 220, 

293 295 
Woodfleld, R. r. (1887), 16 Cox, ' 

314 . . 1247 
Woodford r. Ashley (1809), 11 Eastj 

508 298 801 
Woodhall, Ex parte (1888), 20 Q. B. ' 

D. 832 . . 289 

- R. r. (1872), 12 Cox, 240 216, 

530 
Woodhead, R. v. (1836), 1 M. k Rod. 

549 . . 514, 673 

(1847), 2 C. k K. 

520.. 415 
Woodier, R. r. (1834), 1 M. k Rob. 

390.. 401 
Woodman, R. r. (1879), 14 Cox, 179 600 
Woodroffe r. Williams (1815), 6 

Taunt. 19 . . 359 
Woodrow. R. r. (1798), 2 T. R. 731 148, 

1260 
Woods, R. r. (1863), 6 Cox. 224 . . 211, 

419 



cxxvi 



Table of Cotes. 



PAGE 

Woodward p. Cotton (1834), 1 Cr. 

M.*R. 44.. 346 

— R. p. (1785), 1 Leach, 

258n.. 643 

(1796), 2 East, P. 

C. 663 . . 69, 698 

(1881), 1 Mood. 

323.-68,298,306,662 

(1838), 8 C. k P. 

661.. 38 

(1862), L. * C. 

122.. 661 
Wookey, R. p. (1899), 68 J. P. 409 1044 
Wooleock, R. p. (1833), 6 C. k P. 

516 . . 1099, 1106, 1107 
Wooldridge, R. r. (1784), 1 Leach, 

807 . . 970, 974 
Woolford's Estate (Trustee of) p. 

Levy (1892), 1 Q. B. 772 . . 1084 
Wooller, R. p. (1817), 2 Stark. (N. 

P.) 211.. 216 
Woolley, R. r. (1860), 4 Cox, 261, 

265 .. 560, 661, 663 

(1850), 4 Cox, 462 278 

(I860), 1 Den. 569.. 597, 

599 
Woolmer, R. p. (1832), 1 Mood. 334 807 
Woolnotu p. Meadows (1814), 6 East, 

468.. 1129 
Woolston, R. p. (1729), 2 Sir. 884 . . 1022 
Wootton p. Dawkins (1857), 2 C. B. 

(N. 8.) 412.. 853 
Worcester, R. p. (1688), Skin. 101 291 
Worker, R. p. (1827), 1 Mood. 166 867 
World (The), R. p. (1876), 13 Cox, 

805.. 150 
Worlev, R. p. (1849), 3 Cox, 536 . . 1044, 

1060 

Worrall, R. p. (1836), 7 C. k P. 516 492 

Worrell's Case (in cert.), Trem. 106 620 

Wortiev, R. r. (1846), 1 Deo. 162 . . 639 

-^— (1861), 2 Den. 838.. 566, 

572 
Wright p. Clements (1820), 3 B. k 

Aid. 503 . . 802 

— p. Pindar (1670), Aleyn. 18 368 

— p. Wallasey L. B. (1887), 

18Q. B. D.784.. 646 

Wright R. p. (1671), 1 Vent. 169 . . 74 

— (1786), 2 St. 1041 . , 190 

(1768), 1 Burr. 643 . . 4, 

120, 122 

(1799), 8 T. R. 293 . . 146. 



(1823), R. k R. 456.. 28, 

29, 387, 418 

(1832), 8 B. k Ad. 681 1217 

(1884), 7 C. k P. 169 519 

Wright p. R. (1834), 1 A. k E. 484 73, 

289, 1215 

— R. p. (1841), 9 C. k P. 754 786 

— r. R. (1849), 14 Q. B. 148 282, 

288, 1284 

— R. r. (1858), Dears, k B. 

481 . . 486, 569, 578 
(1860), 2 F. * F. 320 297 



PICE 

Wright, R. p. (1866), 4 F. k F. 967 422, 

911 
Wroughton, R. p. (1786), 8 Burr. 

1683 . . 149, 160, 1028, 1026 
Wroxton, R. p. (1888), 1 B. k Ad. 

640.. 1175 
Wyat, R. v. (1708), 1 Salk. 880 .. 1086 
Wyatt p. Bateman (1836), 7 C. k P. 

686.. 881 

— r. Gore (1816), Holt (N. P.), 

229.. 1119, 1128a 

— R. r. (1870), 89 L. J. (M. C.) 

88.. 219, 911 

(1904), 1 K. B. 188 . . 807, 

811, 613, 616, 1149 
Wych r. Meal (1734), 3 P. Wnw. 

810.. It 
Wycherley, R. r. (1888), 8 C. k P. 

262 . . 229, 828 
Wykes, R. v. (1788), Andr. 288 .. 147 
Wylde, R. r. (1884), 6 C. k P. 380 414 
Wylie, R. v. (1804), 1 B. k P. 

(N. R.) 92. .810, 811, 312, 720 
(And see Whilev.) 
Wymark's Case (1593), 5 Co. Rep. 

78a.. 880 
Wymer, R. p. (1830), 4 C. k P. 391 58, 

62 
Wynn, R. r. (1802), 2 East, 226 . . 121 

(1848), 1 Den. 366 . . 510, 

512 

(1887), 16 Cox, 231 . . 458 

Wynne, R. p. (1786), 1 Leach, 413 446 



TAKDELL, R. p. (1792), 4 T. R. 

621 . . 74, 104 
Tardley p. Arnold (1842), 10 M. k 

W. 14 1 . • 887 
Yarkhill, R. p. (1889), 9 C. k V. 

218. 1234 
Yates, R. p. (1827), 1 Mood. 170 '..' 602 

(1841), C. k Mar. 132 408, 

1050, 1061 

(1867), 7 Cox, 861 .. 248 

(1872), 12 Cox, 283 . . 121, 

991 1130 

(1884), 11 Q. B. D.760 161 

Yates p. R, (1886), 14 Q. B. D. 648 151 
Yeadoo, R. p. (1862), L. k C. 81 . . 216, 

222, 276, 296, 888 
Yend, R. p. (1838), 6 C. k P. 176 . . 469 
Yeomans, R. p. (1700), Andr. 141, 

cit. . . 81 
Yeoveley, R. p. (1888), 8A.iL 

Yewin, R* p. (1811), 2 Camp. 688 .* . 404 
.. . _ - . _. ^ 

446 



York, R. p. (1748), Fort. 70 

(1848), 1 Den. 886 . . 

Yorke (Redhead), R. p. (1795), 25 

St. Tr. 1003 . . 209 
Yorkshire (Justices), R. p. (1837), 7 

A. k E. 683.. 117 
— (W. R.) (Jutticea), R. r. 

(1788), 7 T. R. 467.. 279 



TabU of 

r " fc *«(W ; K.)(UfcJ > R-r. " 
(1770), 5 Burr. 2594. .1 



\ 



__ ('88),2Eiit.353«. - 232 i 

_ »»2),2EMt,342 . . 1235 , 

U806), 7 Eut, 588 • . 1 235, \ 



CXXTli 



imgk 



" ^ r - R- (1813), 2 Do* (H. 

^ K - «"- (1821), 4 a A Aid . 623 
Tom* P , f . 1227, 1235 

"*' *;■ 0**), 1 Burr. 556 . . 147 
p - *• (1788), 3T. R. 98 . -36, 83, 

*MWM) l JEi i t t 14, «#. 145, 

(1838), 8 C* P. 644.. J5, I 

T ^ r - R. 0846), 1 Den. 1M 511,513 

*■ r - (1*47), 2 Cox, 280 . . 243 

r~ 0847), 2 Cox, 291 . - 333 

(1850), 3 C. * K- 106 372 



Tott °K> R- r. (18645), 10 Cox, 371 . . 391, 

791, 1099 

(1878), 14 Cos, 114.. 908 

(1901), 20nurioL.R. 

v „ 228.. 243 

* oanger r. Honner (1843), 1 C. A K. 

YounghuBlmod, R. r. (1835), 4 Xev. 

v - . _, 4 11.850.. 148 

Ynsarn r. Clement (1826). 3 Biog. 

.. ^ „ , *32.. 1131 

1 flcnado, R. r. (1854), 6 Cox, 386 . . 187 



ZEIGERT, R. r. (1867), 10 Cox, 

_ . 555 . . 7l'0 

Zenobio r. Axtell (1795), 6 T. R. 

» . „ 162.. 75, 991 

Zulueta, R. r. (1843), 1 C. A K. 215 39, 

546 
(1843), 1 Cox, 20 . . 186 



ADDENDA ET CORRIGENDA. 



rage 6, line 85, for « 12 & 13 Vict. e. 49 ' read 1 39 & 40 Fief. c. 77, and for 

• 1849 ' r«od • 1876.' 
., 10, „ 23, add «B. v. Oyn<;, 69 /. P. Pep. 151, Fulton, Reoorder.' 
., 118, last Une, for ' 5 & 6 W. 4, c. 76' nod '4 <*5 IT. 4, c. 76/ 
„ 129, line 10, /br ( found as ' read ' found or.' 
,. 131, „ 19, after 'R. v. BoxalV read * 4 A.&E. 513.' 
,. 146, „ 13 from bottom, after • JB. v. Opie • read • 1 TFww. Sa«»d. 300 &/ 
„ 198*. o/ter « P. v. Freeman ' mid « 6 Queensland L. J. 281/ 
,. 215, line 1, after ' defendant ' read ' In.' 
., 219, „ 4, after « P. v. Caiherall ' read • 13 Cos, 109/ 
., 243, „ 7, ff/fcr ' 1?. v. Chichester ' read • 17 Q. P. 504n/ 
., 264, „ 10, after' Marsh v. Keating' read '1 Mont. 4 A. 592/ 
„ 307, „ 8 from bottom, after l R. v. Afean ' add ' now reported 69 J. P. 

Rep. 27 '/ 
,, 320, „ 4, add * The oases discussed on this page have been further 

considered in R. v. Osborne (1905), 1 K. B. 551 (C. C. 22.). 
,. 336, ,. 31, add ' and see R. v. Xfriatt, 69 J. P. Pep. 106, Channell, J/ 
„ 353, „ 19, after ' Doe v. Andrews • read ' 15 Q. B. 756, 759/ 
„ 895, „ 17, after l R. v. Bridgwater' add c now reported (1905), 1 K. B. 

181/ 
„ 431, „ 11 from bottom, at end of ' 24 <t 25 Vict. c. 96, *. 116 ' add « and 

*ee Faulkner v. P., 21 !T. L. R. 417 (2T. P. P.)/ 
Pages 457, 465, cross-references to 4 J5di9. 7, c. 10, should be to p. 575. 
Page 574, „ 81, after l R. v. Clarke * read • 69 /. P. Pep. 150 (C. C. P.)/ 
„ 589, line 7 from bottom, for 'post, p. 589 ' read * ante, p. 587, pott, p. 590/ 
., 501, „ 5 from bottom, odd the following paragraph :— 

1 The defendant was a clerk in the employment of a firm 

of tailors who carried on business in London, with a branch 

establishment in Paris. The defendant was employed in 

Paris, and it was his duty to receive moneys on account of 

his employers at the establishment in Paris, and to pay the 

moneys into a bank in Paris, and on each day to enter the 

sums so received on a slip furnished to him for that purpose 

and to transmit the slip by post to the firm in London. A 

book called the Paris cash account book was kept in the 

office in London in which one of the partners of the firm 

entered the sums received from Paris from the slips sent over 

by the defendant. The defendant knew that the book was 

so kept, and that items omitted by him from the slips would 



cxxz 



Addenda et Corrigenda. 



Page 


i 610, 


line 


» 


616, 


ii 


i» 


622, 


«« 


»i 


686, 


i» 


>> 


671, 


ii 


it 


692, 


ii 



ii 


701, 


ii 


ii 


701, 


H 


ii 


780, 


ii 


ii 


790, 


ii 


ii 


886, 


ii 


ii 


888, 


ii 


?» 


885, 


ii 


ti 


889, 


ii 


ii 


892, 


ii 


91 


900, 


ii 


tl 


918, 


ii 


»l 


920, 


ii 


II 


1061, 


ii 


II 


1071, 


ii 


II 


1194, 


ii 


II 


1182, 


»i 


II 


1188, 


ii 


II 


1145, 


H 


J! 


1148, 


ii 



necessarily be omitted from the book. The defendant fraudu- 
lently omitted to enter on the slips three sums received by 
him in Paris on acoount of his employers. When in London 
the defendant went through the book and compared it with 
the slips after two of the three items had been omitted 
therefrom. The jury found him guilty of an offence against 
s. 1 of the Falsification of Accounts Act, 1875 (88 & 89 Vict, 
c. 24), viz. of having omitted and concurred in omitting the 
above three sums from the Paris cash account book kept in 
London. Held, Alverstone, C.J., Latorance and Ridley, JJ. 
(Kennedy and Channell, JJ., doubting), that upon the above 
facts the defendant could be properly convicted. R. v. 
Oliphanl (April 8, 1905), 21 T. L. R. 416 (C. C. JR.): 
14 from bottom, after l R. v. Taylor ' read ' 457 ' for • 547.* 
6, after ' R. v. Smith ' add ' now reported 69 J. P. Rep. 51.' 

27, add ' And see R. v. Stevenson, 69 J. P. Rep. 84.' 
11, after ' R. v. Kearney ' read ' Jebb (Circ. Ct. I.), 99/ 
19 from bottom, after ' prove ' insert ' a total demolition/ 

13, add ' In R. v. Parry (1900), 85 L. J. Newsp. 456, at Chester 
Assizes, Lord Russell, C.J., after consulting Grantham, J., 
lield that a man could be convicted under this section for 
maliciously injuring an animal belonging to him.' 

28, for « in R. v. Welch ' read ' And R. v. WelcJi: 

24, for ' (ante, p. 698), where ' read < (ante, p. 693). Where.' 

25, after ' Commonwealth v. Bowen ' read ' 18 Mass. 356 (ed. 1816).' 
28, after * R. v. Brown ' read ' 1 Leach, 148.* 

5, after * Cole v. Turner ' read l 6 Mod. 149.' 

5, for ' Ooddard v. Green ' read ' Green v. Goddard: 

26 from bottom J /or . for , rtad . ^ , 

13 i. 



J 



21 



»l 



„ 1160, „ 



a/to/' ' R. v. Linsberg ' a<W ' now reported 69 
J. P. Rep. 107.' 
21 „ after • i?. v. £««;<?« ' read 4 2 Co*, 279.' 

16, a/^ur 4 i*. v. Chandra Dharma ' add 4 affirmed by C. C. K., 
21 T. L. R. 858.' 

1, /or ' 57 d) 58 Vic*, c-41, *. 17 ' read « 4 JSfciir. 7, c. 15, s. 17.' 

8 from bottom,/or «4tf5 >r. <£ M. 4, c. 67 ' read *4<£5 H r .4,c.67.' 

18, a/ter * JR. v. Johnson ' read ' 2 Stow. 1.' 

19, after ' ii. v. Westropp ' read ' 2 Ir. C. L. Rep. 217.' 
4 from bottom, after ' R. v. Sfrwner ' read * Lofft, 55.* 

6, add ' as to the meaning of the words " his property," see 2<. v. 
Humphris (1904), 2 K. B. 89.' 

2, after « R. v. Creese ' odd « But see R. v. Uwrnpfcrn (1904), 
2 K. B. 89.' 

21, add • In i*. v. Coyn«, 69 «T. P. ifcp. 151, Fulton, Recorder, where 
the defendant induced persons to pay to him oash by way of 
premiums for apprenticeship (which was not returnable), it 
was held that he obtained money and not " credit." ' 
4, after ' Glamorgan Coal Co. v. South Wales Miners* Federa- 
tion' add* affirmed in H. L. April 14, 1900/ 



BOOK I. 

PLEADING, PRACTICE, AND EVIDENCE GENERALLY, 



PART I. 

PLEADING AND PRACTICE GENERALLY. 



CHAPTEB I. 

INDICTMENT. 

SlCT. 1. What, and in what cases it lies, p. 1. 

2. Against whom it lies, p. 11. 

3. Form of it, p. 35. 

4. Joinder of two or more Defendants in one Indictment, p. 86. 

5. Joinder of several Offences in different Counts in one Indictment t 

p. sa 

6. Caption, p. 93. 

7. Within what Time Vie BUI must be preferred, p. 9L 

8. How found, p. 98. 

9. Process on, p. 103. 

10. Bail on, p. 110. 

11. In what Cases quashed, p. 120. 

12. When and where tried, p. 1*23. 

13. Certiorari, p. 129. 

14. Nolle Prosequi, p. 189. 



Sect. 1. 
indictment, what, and in what cases it lies. 

AN "indictment" is a written accusation of crime, made at the suit of 
the King, against one or more persons, and preferred to, and pre- 
sented upon oath by, a grand jury; a "bill of indictment" is such 
written accusation before it is so presented. 

It is the ordinary common law remedy for all treasons and felonies, 
far misprisions of treason and felony, and for misdemeanors of a public 
Bifeare: 2 Hawk. c. 25, ss. 1, 4. In the case of treason and felony it is 
bow the sole remedy except (1) that — rarely used — of impeachment, 
appeals of felony having been abolished in 1819 by 59 Geo. 3, c. 46 : 
(a) that of a coroner's inquisition in cases of murder or manslaughter 
(see post, Book I. ch. Hi.) : (3) the summary remedy permitted in certain 
eases of -felony and misdemeanor under the Summary Jurisdiction Acts of 
1879 (42 A 43 Viet. c. 49) and 1899 (62 <ft 63 Vict. c. 22). In the case of 
misdemeanors, there is also an alternative remedy by way of information, 
f*. post, Book I. eh. it. p. 139. 

AX.P X- 1 

ft 



2 Indictment. 

Breacltes of common law duly."] — An indictment lies at common law for 
a breach of duty, which is not a mere private injury, but an outrage on 
the moral duties of society. Perhaps the most important example is the 
neglect to provide sufficient food or other necessaries (as to medical aid, 
see B. v. Smith, 8 C. A P. 153 : Sellen v. Norman, 4 C. <fe P. 80 : WennaU v. 
Adney, 3 B. <fe P. 247 ; 6 B. B. 780 : B. v. Senior [1899] 1 Q. B. 283 ; 
Bussell, L. C. J., at p. 289) for a person unable to provide for himself, and 
for whom the defendant is obliged by duty or contract to provide, where 
such neglect injures the health of that person, whether the person injured 
be of extreme age (/?. v. Marriott, 8 C. <fe P. 425 ; B. v. Instan [1893] 1 
Q. B. 450), or of tender years (B. v. Friend, B.&B.20-.B. v. Hogan, 

2 Den. 277; 20 L. J. (If. C.) 219 : B. v. Phillpot, Dears. 179; 22 L. J. 
(I/. C.) 113 : B. v. Chandler, Dears. 453 ; 24 L. J. (M. 0.) 109 ; B. v. 
Byland, L. B. 1 C. C. B. 99 ; 37 L. J. (M. C.) 10 ; 10 Cox, 882 : B. v. Bugg, 
12 Cox, 16 (C. C. -R.) : J?, v. Jones, 19 Cae, 678), or the defendant's servant 
(B. v. Bidley, 2 Camp. 650 : B. v. Smift, X. & C. 607 ; 34 L. J. (If. C.) 
153), or apprentice (B. v. &/f, 1 Leach, 137; 1 JStwf, P. C. 226: 2*. v. 
Smith, 8C.&P. 153), or a lunatic (/?. v. Peftam, 8 Q. B. 959 ; 15 L. J. 
(If. C.) 105. Cf. 24 <fe 25 Ftef. c. 100, *. 26 (servants and apprentices), 
53 & 54 Vict. c. 5, a. 322 (lunatics) ; 4 ifriu;. 7, c. 15, s. 1 (children). It also 
lies for any act of wilful negligence, whereby human life or health is 
endangered, such as shipping dangerous combustibles without informing 
the ship-master : Williams v. H. & I. Co., 3 East, 192 ; 6 B. B. 589 ; or 
exposing for sale, or possessing, with intent to sell, provisions unfit for 
human food : B. v. Mackarty, 6 East, 133, 141, cit. ; 2 Ld. Baym. 1179 ; 

3 Ld. Baym. 487 : B. v. Dixon, 3 M . & Sel. 11; 15 B. R. 301 : B. v. 
Jfaynes, 4 M . <fc &7. 214 : B. v. Stevenson, 3 P. <fe P. 106 : £AtHifo v. 
Thompson, 1 0- #. #• 12 ; 45 L. /. (if. C.) 18. It also lies for acts in- 
tended to interfere with or pervert the course of justice, e.g., for disposing 
of a dead body so as to prevent the coroner from holding an inquest upon 
it where an inquest ought to be held: B. v. Price, 12 Q. B. D. 247; 53 
L. J. (M. C.) 51 : B. v. Stephenson, 13 Q. B. D. 331 ; 53 L. J.{M. C.) 176 ; 
but not for burning a dead body instead of burying it, unless it be so done 
as to cause a public nuisance : B. v. Price, ubi sunra ; for manufacturing 
false evidence for the purpose of misleading a judicial tribunal, although 
the evidence is not in fact used : B. .v. Vreones [1891] 1 Q. B. 360 ; 60 
L. J. (M. C.) 62 ; 17 Cox, 267 : or for attempting to pervert the course of 
public justice by publishing articles in a newspaper affecting the conduct 
or character of persons awaiting trial : B. v. Titbits and Windust [1902] 

1 K. B. 77; 20 Cox, 70, (C. C. BX and cases there cited: B. v. Parke 
[1903] 2 K. B. 432. 

It also lies for all nuisances of a public nature, though occasioned by an 
act in itself innocent, if the nuisance be the probable oonsequenoe of the 
act B. v. Moore, 3 B. & Ad. 184 ; 37 B. B. 383 ; and see 1 Bawk. c. 75, ss. 
6, 7. Under this head falls the remedy against a common innkeeper who 
either refuses to receive a traveller as guest in his house or to find him 
victuals or lodging on being tendered a reasonable price: see B. v. Bymer, 

2 Q. B. D. 136 ; 46 L. J. (M. C.) 108 ; 13 Cox, 378 ; 1 Buss. Cr. (6th ed.) 740. 

Attempts to commit offences."] — Mere intention to commit an offence is 
not indictable, except in the case of high treason, as to which it is said 
that under 25 Edw. 3, st. 5, c. 2, voluntas reputatur pro facto ; but in 
all cases where the intent to commit a crime is manifested by any overt 
act, the party may be indicted for an attempt to commit the offence. 
1 Deacon Cr. L. 643 : B. v. Scojield, Cold. 397 : It. v. Biggins, 2 East, 5, 21 ; 
« /?. B. 615 ; B. v. Chapman, 1 Den. 432; 18 L. J. (AT. r.) 152: 3 Cox, 



When it lies. 3 

467 : B. v. Taylor, \F.& F. 511 : B. v. Duckworth [1892] 2 Q. B. 83 ; 
17 Cox, 495. And it is perfectly clear that every attempt (not every 
intention) to commit a felony or misdemeanor is a misdemeanor at 
common law, whether the crime attempted is one by statute or at common 
law. B. v. Rentier, 11 Cox, 570 (C7. C. B.) : B. v. Roderick, 7 C. & P. 795, 
Parke, B: i?. v. Martin, 2 Mood C. C. 123; 9 C. & P. 213, 215: R. v. 
Bansford, 13 Con, 9 (C. (7. B.)i B. v. Cartwright, B. & B. 107, n. : B. v. 
Butler, 6 CAP. 368. This doctrine has been applied to an attempt to 
commit suicide. R. v. Doody, 6 Cos, 463: 2?. v. Burgess, L. & C. 258; 9 
Cox, 302; 32 Z. J. (M. C.) 185. 

To constitute an attempt the act done must be immediately connected 
with the commission of the offence. B. v. Eagleton, Dears, 515; 24 
L. J. (M. C.) 158: B. v. Cheeseman, L. <ft C. 140; 31 L. J. (M. 0.) 89; 
9 Cfcr, 100 : 5. v. Boberts, Dears. 539 ; 25 L. J. (M. C.) 17. Thus, the 
procuring of indecent prints with intent to sell them is an indictable 
misdemeanor; but the merely keeping and preserving them with that 
intent is not Dugdale v. B., 1 E. & B. 435 ; Dears. 64 ; 22 L. J. {M. C.) 
50. So the procuring of base coin with intent to utter is indictable at 
common law (& v. Fuller, B. A B. 308), but the mere possession of base 
coin with intent to utter it is not indictable at common law. B. v. 
Stewart, B.&B.288: B. v. Heath, B. & B. 184. It is so now, in certain 
circumstances, under 24 & 25 Vict. c. 99, s. 11, post, tit. Coining ; and 
possession of coining tools with intent to use them is indictable at common 
law. B. v. Sutton, 1 East, P. C. 172 ; Cos. K. B., temp. Hardw. 379. To 
render a person criminally liable for an attempt to commit an offence 
it is not necessary to show that if no interruption had taken place the 
attempt could have succeeded. B. t. Brown, 24 Q. B. D. 357 ; 59 L. J. 
(M. C.) 47; 16 Cox, 715: B. v. Bing, 61 L. J. (M. C.) 116 ; 17 Cox, 491 
(C. C. B.) : B. v. Williams [1893] 1 Q. B. 320; 62 L. J. (M. C.) 29, which 
oyerrule B. v. Collins, L. & C. 471 ; 33 L. J. (M. C.) 177 ; 9 Cox, 497, in 
which it had been held that if a person puts his hand into the pocket of 
another with intent to steal what he can find there, and the pocket is 
empty, lie cannot be convicted of an attempt to steal. 

Incitement.} — To solicit or incite another to commit a crime is an 
indictable misdemeanor at common law, even though the solicitation or 
incitement has no effect. B. v. Quail, 4 F. & F. 1076 : B. v. Gregory, 
L. B. 1 C. C. B. 77 ; 36 L. J. (M. C.) 60. This includes an offer of a 
bribe to a person to commit an offence. Wade v. Broughton, 3 V. & B. 
172 : and an attempt to incite to the commission of crime is also an in- 
dictable misdemeanor at common law. B. v. Bansford, 13 Cox, 9 (<7. C. B.\ 
It is immaterial whether the principal offence is one existing by the 
common law or is created by statute. As to incitement to murder, see 
poet, Book II. ch. ii. s. 1. 

Disobedience to statutes.'] — Where a statute declares any act or omission 
to be treason, felony, misprision of treason or misdemeanor, an indictment 
lies in respect of such act or omission. And even though a statute does 
not use express terms describing the nature of the offence, if it prohibits 
a matter of public grievance to the liberties and securities of the subject, 
or commaiHU a matter of public convenience (such as the repairing of 
highways or the like), all acts or omissions contrary to the prohibition or 
command of the statute are misdemeanors at common law, punishable by 
indictment, unless such method of procedure do manifestly appear to be 
excluded by it 2 Hawk. c. 25, s. 4: B. v. Davis, Say. 163: R. v. Sains- 
bury, 4 T. B. 451 ; 2 B. B. 433 : B. v. Price, 11 A. A E. 727 : B. v. Stephenson, 



4 Indictment. 

13 Q. B. D. 331 ; 53 L. J. (M. C.) 176 : R. v. Hall [1891] 1 Q. B. 747 ; 60 L. J. 
(M. C.) 124. In R. v. Kenyon [1901], 36 L. J. Newsp. 371, an indictment 
was framed for contravening s. 8 of the Disused Burial Grounds Act, 1884 
(47 & 48 Vict. c. 72) by building on a disused Boman Catholic burial-ground. 
The remedy usually sought is injunction (see re Pons/ord and Newport Dis- 
trict School Board [1894] 1 Ch. 454 ; 63 L. J., Ch. 278. But Phillimore, J., 
seems to have considered the indictment good, and the defendants pleaded 
guilty, and in two cases were sentenced to imprisonment. If a statute 
specify a mode of proceeding different from that by indictment, then, if the 
matter were already an indictable offence at common law, and the statute 
merely introduces a different mode of prosecution and punishment, the 
remedy is alternative, and the prosecutor has still the option of pro- 
ceeding by indictment at common law, or by the mode pointed out by 
the statute. Castle's case, Cro. Jae. 644 : R. v. Robinson, 2 Burr. 799, 805 : 
R. v. Wigg, 2 Ld. Raym. 1163; 2 Salk. 460 : R. v. BcUme, 2 Cowp. 648 : 
R. v. Richard Carlile, 3 B. <fe Aid. 161 : and see 2 Hale, 191 ; 1 Saund. 135, 
and notes; Hardcastle on Statutes (3rd ed.), 234; Maxwell on Statutes (3rd 
ed.), 568. And even if a statute prohibit, under a penalty, an act which 
was before lawful, and a subsequent statute (R. v. Boyall, 2 Burr. 832), or 
the same statute (in a subsequent substantive clause), ordain a mode of 
proceeding for the penalty different from that by indictment, the prosecutor 
may, notwithstanding, proceed by indictment upon the prohibitory 
clause, as for a misdemeanor at common law, or he may at his option 
proceed in the manner pointed out by the statute. 2 Hale, 171 : R. ▼. 
Wright, 1 Burr. 543 ; and see R. v. Jones, 2 Str. 1146 : R. v. Harris, 4 T. R. 
202 ; 2 R. R. 358 : R. v. Buchanan, 8 Q. B. 883 ; 15 L. J. (Q. B.) 227 : R. v. 
Hall [1891] 1 Q. B. 747, at 770; 50 L. J. (M. C.) 124, Charles, J. : Saunders 
v. Holbom District Board [1895] 1 Q. B. 64, 69 ; 64 L. J. (<?. B.) 101. But 
if the manner of proceeding for the penalty be contained in the tame 
clause which prohibits the act, the mode of proceeding given by the 
statute must be pursued, and no other ; for the express mention of any 
other mode of proceeding impliedly excludes that of indictment. R. ▼. 
Robinson, 2 Burr. 799, 805: R. v. Buck, 2 Str. 679: R. v. Hall, ub% 
supra ; R. v. Lovibond, 19 W. R. 753. Where a statute, in one clause, 
declares an act to be a public nuisance, it is indictable, though a sub- 
sequent clause subjects it to a pecuniary penalty recoverable by " infor- 
mation, bill, plaint, or action at law," or makes it abateable. R. v. Crow- 
shaw, Bell, 303 ; 30 L. J. (M. C.) 58 ; 8 Cox, 375 : R. v. Gregory, 5 B. <fc 
Ad. 555 ; 3 L. J. (if. (7.) 25. It is now an established rule of construction 
that " where an act or omission constitutes an offence under two or more 
acts, or both under an act and at common law, whether any such act was 
passed before or after " January 1, 1890, the offender Bhall, " unless the 
contrary intention appears, be liable to be punished under either or any 
of those acts, or at common law, but shall not be liable to be punished 
twice for the came offence." 52 & 53 Vict, c 63 {Interpretation Act, 1889) 
ss. 33, 42. Thus if, in the case of a common-law misdemeanor, a new 
mode of punishment or new mode of proceeding merely be directed, 
without altering the class or nature of the offence, the new punishment 
or new mode of proceeding is alternative, and the offender may be in- 
dicted as before for the common-law misdemeanor (tf. v. Richard Carlife, 
3 B. & Aid. 161) ; and the mere declaration that an offence shall be 
felony which was so at common law docs not create a new offence. 
Williams v. R., 7 Q. B. 250, 253, Pattescn, J. But if a later statute 
expressly alters the quality of an offence, e.g. by making it a misde- 
meanor instead of a felony, or a felony instead of a misdemeanor, the 
offence cannot be proceeded for under the earlier statute, Michell y, 



When it lies. & 

Brown, XE.&E. 267 ; 28 L. J. (M. C.) 53 ; B. v. Crass, 1 Ld. Jlaym. 711 ; 

3 Salk. 193. This result equally follows if the words " feloniously " or 

"deemed to be a felony " are used in the later act. B. v. Johnson, 3 M.& 

SeL 539, 556 ; 16 B. B. 352 : Bayley, J. : B. v. Solomons, 1 Mood. C. C. 

292; overruling B. v. Gale, 1 Jfood. (7. C 11. And if a later statute 

describes an offence created by a former statute, and affixes to it 

a different punishment, varying the procedure, and giving an appeal 

where there was no appeal before, the prosecutor must proceed for the 

offence under the later statute. MicheU v. Brown, ubi supra. And where 

a statute make the doing of an sat felonious, if a subsequent statute make 

it penal only, the latter statute is a virtual repeal of the former, so far as 

relates to the punishment of the offence. 1 Hawk. c. 40, s. 5. Where, 

therefore, a statute (9 Geo. 1, c. 22) made an offence a capital felony, and 

a subsequent statute (16 Geo. 3, c. 30) imposed a forfeiture of twenty 

pounds for the same offence when first committed, recoverable before 

justices of the peace, and mado the second offence felony, the latter 

statute was held virtually to repeal so much of the former statute as 

related to the offence. B. v. Davis, 1 Leach, 271. 

Disobedience to rules and orders made under statutory authority?] — Dis- 
obedience to an older relating to quarantine, made by the king in 
council under statutory authority, has been held to be an indictable 
misdemeanor at common law. B. v. Harris, 4 T. B. 202, explained in 
R. v. HaU [1891] 1 Q. B. 747, 765 ; 60 L. J. (M. C.) 124. And where a 
statute, the matter of which concerns the public in general, delegates to 
commissioners the power to make orders under it, disobedience to an 
order made by them in pursuance of such power is an indictable mis- 
demeanor at common law. B. v. Walker, L. B. 10 Q. B. 355 ; 44 L. J. 
(M. C.) 169. As to failure by overseers to account to a poor law auditor, 
see B. v. Crossley, 10 A. & E. 132; 8 L. J. (Af. G.) 81. Where a corpora- 
tion were authorized by a public statute to make a towing-path on the 
side of a river, it was held to be an indictable misdemeanor at common 
law to obstruct the corporation in the execution of the powers given them 
by the statute. B. v. Smith, 2 Doug. 441. Disobedience to an order of a 
court of competent jurisdiction is indictable at common law. B. v. 
Bobiitson, 2 Burr. 799, 804 ; B. v. Mortlock, 7 Q. B. 459 : B. v. Brisby, 1 
Ben. 416 ; 18 L. J. (AT. G.) 157 : B. v. Jeyes, SA.&E. 416 : B. v. Johnson, 
±M.*Sc SeL 515 ; and see post, pi. ii. c. iii. s. 13. It wan an indictable mis- 
demeanor to obstruct a coroner in the execution of the duties imposed 
upon him by 4 Edio. 1, st. 2 (stat. de officio coronatoris). B. v. Price, 12 
Q. B. D. 247 ; 53 L. J. (M. G.) 51 : B. v. Stephenson, 13 Q. B. D. 331 ; 53 
L, J. (If. (7.) 176; and the same would probably be held in the case of 
an obstruction of the coroner in the execution of the duties imposed upon 
him by The Coroners Act, 1887 (50 & 51 Vict. c. 71), which repeals and 
replaces the old statute. 

' Private injuries.]— An. indictment will not lie for a mere private injury 
against an individual : as for enticing away his apprentice ; B. v. Daniel, 
1 Salk. 380; entering his close, digging the ground, erecting a shed 
thereon, expelling him and keeping him out of possession ; R. v. Storr, 3 
Burr. 1698 : Ii. v. Bake, lb. 1731 ; pulling the thatch off a dwelling- 
house, of which he was in peaceable possession ; B. v. Atkins, lb. 1706 ; 
or for a private cheat; B. v. Osborh, ib. 1697 ; or for excluding commoners 
hj enclosing, Willoughby's case [1588], Cro. Eliz. 90, or the like. The 
remedy for injuries of this description is by action only, unless they in 
some measure concern the King, or are accompanied by circumstances 



6 Indictment 

which amount to a breach of the peace. Anon., 3 Sulk. 187. Nor will an 
indictment lie for the infringement of a right common, not to all his 
majesty's subjects, but only to the inhabitants of a particular district. 
1 Hawk. c. 76, *. 1 : Co. Litt. 56 a : Westhury v. Powel, cited in Fineuz v. 
Hovenden, Cro. Eliz. 664; R. v. Thrower,! Vent. 208; 3 £eW<?,28: Austin's 
case, 1 Vent. 189. So an indictment will not lie for the infringement of 
rights which are merely private, though regulated by a public statute; 
R. v. Richards, 8 T. R. 634 ; 5 R. R. 489 : and see Com. Dig. Indictment 
(/).) ; nor for an act prohibited by a private statute, which tends merely 
to the damage of a particular individual ; R. v. Pawlyn, 1 Sid. 208; nor 
will it lie for a mere breach of the bye-laws or customs of a corporation. 
7?. v. Sharpies, 4 T. R. Til: R. v. Gorge, 3 Salk. 189. See Com. Dig. 
Indictment (£.); 1 Rim. Cr. (6th ed.), 195, 201 ; and see ante, p. 3. 

Offences indictable at election of accused.']— An offence punishable on 
summary conviction beforo justices, other than an assault, may, at the 
option of the accused, under certain circumstances be converted into an 
indictable offence, under the Summary Jurisdiction Act, 1879 (42 <£ 43 
Vict. c-. 49, s. 17, which enacts as follows : " (1.) A person when charged 
before a court of summary jurisdiction, with an offence, in respect of the 
commission of which an offender is liable on sumrirary conviction to be 
imprisoned for a term exceeding three months, and which is not an assault, 
may, on appearing before the court, and before the charge is gone into 
but not afterwards, claim to be tried by a jury ; and thereupon the court 
of summary jurisdiction shall deal with the case in all respects as if the 
accused were charged with an indictable offence and not with an offence 
punishable on summary conviction, and the offence shall as respects the 
person so charged be deemed to be an indictable offence, and if the person 
so charged is committed for trial, or bailed to appear for trial, shall be 
prosecuted accordingly, and the expenses of the prosecution shall be 
payable as in cases of felony. . . . (3.) This section shall not apply to the 
case of a child, unless the parent or guardian of the child is present ; " but 
if he is, " the claim under this section may be made by such parent or 
guardian." A list of the enactments to which this provision applies is 
given in Douglas, Summary Jurisdiction Procedure (8th ed.), 149. There 
are several other statutes, such as 12 tfc 13 Vict. c. 49 {Prevention of 
Cruelty to Animals Act, 1849), s. 15; 38 <fc 39 Vict. c. 86 (Conspiracy and 
Protection of Property Act, 1875), s, 9, and 50 <fe 51 Vict. c. 28 {Merchandise 
Marks Act, 1887), -s. 2, sub-s. 6, which expressly enable a defendant, when 
accused of an offence punishable on summary conviction under those 
statutes, to insist upon a trial by indictment. It is the duty of the Oourt 
of Summary Jurisdiction before going into the case to inform the accused 
of his right to elect: and failure to do so invalidates the subsequent 
summary proceedings. R. v. Cockshott [1898] 1 Q. B. 582; 67 L. J. Q. B. 
467. When the defendant elects to be tried on indictment the procedure 
and powers of the court of trial are the same as in the case of an ordinary 
misdemeanor, and are not those of the court of summary jurisdiction ; see 
R. v. Clerk of Peace for Manchester (1889), in Stone's Justice (35th ed.), 42. 

Effect of repeal on pending proceedings.'] — By the unqualified repeal of 
the statute on which an indictment is framed, though it takes place after 
the finding of the bill, (but before plea pleaded,) the proceedings fall to 
the ground and no judgment can be pronounced. R. v. Denton, Dears. 3 ; 
18 Q. B. 761 ; 21 L. J. (M. C.) 207; see R. v. Mawgan in Meneaoe, 8 A. <fe 
E. 496; 7 L. J. {M. C.) 98. And where a prisoner was indicted for 
privately stealing from a shop against 10<fc 11 W. 3, c 16 {c 23, Ruffhea<T) 3 



Vexatious Indictments. 7 

which was repealed after the offence was committed, but before the 
prisoner was tried, by 1 Q. 4, c. 117, s. I (rep.), it was held that the 
prisoner could not be sentenced under the repeated act. E. v. M'Kenzie, 
E. <fc E. 429. But it has been held that an indictment for conspiracy to 
violate a statute, being a common law offence, will lie after the repeal 
of the statute, or in respect of an offence committed before the repeal. 
E. t. Thompson, 16 Q. E. 832 : 20 L. J. (M. C.) 183. As to statutes passed 
since 1889, the Interpretation -4c/, 1889 (52 A 53 Vict. c. 63), s. 38, provides 
that where an Act " repeals any other enactment, then unless the contrary 
intention appears, the repeal shall not . . . affect any penalty, forfeiture 
or punishment incurred in respect of any offence committed againstrany 
enactment so repealed, or affect any investigation, legal proceeding, or 
remedy in respect of any such . . . penalty, forfeiture or punishment as 
aforesaid;" and that "any such investigation, legal proceeding, or 
remedy may be instituted, continued or enforced, and any such penalty, 
forfeiture or punishment may be imposed as if the repealing act had not 
been passed. 9 ' See E. v. Webb (1904) 197 Cent. Cr. Ct. Sess. Pap. 627, Walton 
J. Particular clauses to the like effect were common in prior statutes : 
as to their effect, see E. v. Smith, L. & C. 131 ; 31 L. J. ( M. C.) 105. 

Vexatious indictments.'] — At common law any person was at liberty to 
prefer a bill of indictment before a grand jury against another for any 
indictable offence, without any previous inquiry before a justice into the 
truth of the accusation. This right was often much abused, because as 
the grand jury only hear the evidence for the prosecution, and the accused 
is unrepresented before them, it frequently happened that a person 
innocent of the charge made against him, and who had no notice that any 
proceedings were about to be instituted, found that a grand jury had been 
induced to find a true bill against him, and so to injure his character and 
put him to great expense and inconvenience in defending himself against 
a groundless accusation. This common law right has been restricted by 
legislation in the case of a number of crimes. The Vexatious Indictments 
Act, 1859 (22 <*23 Viet, c 17), provides («. 1) that " no bill of indictment 
for any of the offences following " (see list Mow) shall be presented to or 
found by any grand jury, unless the prosecutor or other person presenting 
such indictment has been bound by recognizance to prosecute or give 
evidence against the person accused of such offence, or unless the person 
accused has been committed to or detained in custody, or has been bound 
by recognizance to appear to answer to an indictment to be preferred 
against him for such offence, or unless such indictment for such offence, if 
charged to have been committed in England, be preferred by the direction 
or with the consent in writing of a judge of one of the superior courts of 
law at Westminster (i.e. now of the High Court of Justice) or of his 
majesty's attorney-general or solicitor-general for England, or unless 
such indictment for such offence, if charged to have been committed in 
Ireland, be preferred by the direction or with the consent in writing of a 
judge of one of the superior courts of law in Dublin (i.e. now of the Supreme 
Court of Ireland), or of his majesty's attorney-general or solicitor-general 
for Ireland, or (in the case of an indictment for perjury) by the direction 
of any court, judge or public functionary, authorized by the Criminal 
Procedure Act, 1851 (14 & 15 Vict. c. 100), to direct a prosecution for 
perjury." The offences specified in the Act of 1859 are : 

(a) Perjury and subornation of perjury; 



(b) Conspiracy; 



[e) Obtaining money or other property by false pretences (but not the 
mere attempt to obtain : E. v. Burton, 13 Cox y 71, C. C. E.) ; 



(48 



8 Indictment. 

(d) Keeping a gambling house or a disorderly house ; 

(e) And any indecent assault (22 & 23 Vict. c. 17, s. 1). 
To these have been added : 

(/) All misdemeanors under Pari 2 of the Debtors Act, 1869 (32 & 33 
Vict. c. 62, a. 18), as modified by the Bankruptcy Act, 1883 (46 & 47 Vict. c. 
52), and the Bankruptcy Act, 1890 (53 & 54 Vict. c. 71) ; 

(g) All libels or alleged libels, apparently including blasphemous, 
defamatory, seditious and obscene libel (44 <fc45 Vict. c. 60, *. 6) ; 

[h) All misdemeanors under the Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1885 

1 <fc 49 Vict. c. 69, *. 17) ; 

(t) AIL offences punishable on indictment under the MercJiandise Marks 
Act, 1887 (50 & 51 Vict. c. 28, s. 13) ; and 

(J) Misdemeanors under the Prevention of Cruelty to Children Act, 1904 
(4 Edw. 7, c. 15, a. 25). 

A committal for trial by justices sitting in and acting for one petty 
sessional division of a county on a charge arising in another petty sessional 
division of the same county is a pood committal under 22 & 23 Vict, c 17. 
«. 1. B. v. Beckley, 20 Q. B. D. 187; 57 L. J. (if. C.) 22. By s. 2 of the 
Act of 1859, " where any charge or complaint shall be made before any 
one or more of her majesty's justices of the peace that any person has 
committed any of the offences aforesaid within the jurisdiction of such 
justice, and such justice shall rofnse to commit or to bail the person 
charged with such offence to be tried for the same, then in case the 
prosecutor shall desire to prefer an indictment respecting the. said offence, 
it shall be lawful for tho said justice, and he is hereby required, to take 
the recognizance of such prosecutor to prosecute the said charge or com- 
plaint, and to transmit such recognizance, information and depositions, 
if any, to the court in which such indictment ought to be preferred, in tbo 
same manner as such justice would have done in case he had committed 
the person charged to bo tried for such offence." Where a prosecutor 
bona fide prefers before a justice a charge in respect of an offence in tbo 
above list, alleged to have been committed within his jurisdiction, and 
the justice dismisses the charge for want of evidence, — even where there 
is no evidence in support of the charge, — the dismissal is equivalent to a 
refusal to commit, and the prosecutor is entitled under a. 2 to require the 
justice to take his recognizance to prosecute the charge. B. v. Lord Mayor 
of London, ex parte Goatling, 16 Cox, 77 ; 54 L. T. 646 ; 50 J. P. 711 . Where 
a magistrate nas refused to grant process he cannot be compelled to do 
so, nor to take recognizances under the act, unless an indictable offence is 
disclosed by the information : Ex parte Wason, L. B. 4 Q. B. 573 ; and see 
B. v. Battier, 44 J. P. 490 ; ex parte Beid, 49 J. P. 600 ; and tho only 
remedy of the would-be prosecutor is to apply ex parte to a judge of the 
K. B. D. for leave to prefer a bill. 

Jn considering tho sufficiency of a recognizance to prosecute under 
s. 1 of tho Vexatious Indictments Act, reference may be made to the 
accompanying depositions to ascertain the particulars of the offence 
charged. B. v. Bell, 12 Cox, 37. 

If a prosecutor is bound over undor s. 2 after a refusal to commit for 
trial, but fails to send up a bill to the grand jury at the sessions for which 
he is bound before that body is discharged, the court cannot enlarge his 
recognizances to the next sessions. B. v. Eayres [1900], 64 J. P. 217. The 
fiat of the attorney-general may be issued even in cases where the magis- 
trates have already refused to commit for trial. B. v. Bogers, 66 J. P. 825, 
Fulton, Recorder. Where the prosecution is instituted on the fiat of the 
attorney-general, it would seem sufficient to lodge the fiat with the clerk 
of the court of trial, and unnecessary to produce or prove it at the trial. 
B. v. Dexter, 19 Cox, 360, Grantham, J. 



Vexatious Indictments. 

It is not necessary that the performance of any of the conditions 
mentioned in the Vexatious Indictments Act, 1859, should be averred in 
the indictment or proved before the petty jury. Knowlden v. i?., 5 B. A S. 
532; 33 L. /. (if. C.) 219 ; 9 Cox, 483. If a prisoner committed for obtain- 
ing a chattel by false pretences be indicted in one count for that offence, 
and in another count for obtaining another chattel by false pretences, 
without any authority having been obtained under the statute to prefer 
such second charge [excepting where the second charge is founded upon facts 
disclosed in the depositions, 30 <fc 31 Vict. c. 35, s. 1, infra'], the proper course 
k for the judge at the trial to direct the second count to be quashed, and 
not to put the prisoner to plead to it. If, however, the two counts are 
allowed to go to the jury, and evidence is given respecting each charge, 
and the jury convict on each count, the conviction cannot be supported 
on either — not on the second, because it ought to have been quashed ; 
nor on the first, because improper evidence has been received. B. v. 
Fuidge, L. & C. 390 ; 33 L. J. (Af. C.) 74. When the indictment is pre- 
ferred by the direction or with the consent in writing of a judge of one 
of the superior courts, it is for the judge, to whom the application is 
made for such direction or consent, to decide what materials ought to be 
before him, and it is not necessary to summon the party accused, or to 
bring him before the judge. R. v. Bray, 3 B. & S. 255 ; 32 L. J. (M. C.) 
11. Where three persons were committed for conspiracy, and afterwards 
the solicitor-general, acting under this statute, directed a bill to be pre- 
ferred against a fourth person who had not been committed, and all four 
were indicted together for the same conspiracy, such a course was hold to 
be unobjectionable. Knowlden v. B. y ubi supra. It was doubted whether 
an indictment under 24 & 25 Vict. c. 115, s. 57 (rep.), for giving false 
evidence beforo a naval court-martial, was an indictment for perjury 
within the Vexatious Indictments Act, 1859; R. v. Jfeane, 4 B & 8. 947; 
33 L. J. ( Jf. C.) 115 ; and whether that statute applied to offences com- 
mitted out of England and Ireland. Id. Under the present Naval Dis- 
cipline Act (29 <fc 30 Vict. c. 109, «. 67), it is provided that if perjury before 
a court-martial out of England is tried in England all statutes and laws 
applicable to cases of perjury shall apply to the case. 

The Act of 1859 was found to be attended by the inconvenience that it 
was frequently objected on the trial of a prisoner charged with an offence 
Ming under its provisions, that when before the magistrates he had not 
been charged with, nor committed by them for, the precise offence stated 
in the indictment, although it was abundantly evident from the depo- 
sitions that the charge made in the indictment was substantially, although 
perhaps not in form, gone into before the magistrates. This incon- 
venience was remedied by the Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1867 (30 
A 31 Vict. c. 35), which, after reciting that it is found that delay and incon- 
venience are frequently caused by the provisions contained in s. I of 22 Jb 23 
Vict, c 17, in cases not within the misc\ief for remedy whereof that act was 
made and passed, and that it is expedient to restrict the operation thereof, 
enacts (s. 1) that, " the said provisions of the said first section of the said 
Act shall not extend or be applicable to prevent the presentment to or 
finding by a grand jury of any bill of indictment containing a count or 
counts for any of the offences mentioned in the said Act, if such count or 
counts be such as may now be lawfully joined with the rest of such bill 
of indictment, and if the same count or counts be founded (in the opinion 
of the court in or before which the same bill of indictment be preferred) 
upon the facts or evidence disclosed in any examinations or depositions 
taken before a justice of the peace, in the presence of the person accused 
or proposed to be accused by such bill of indictment, and transmitted or 



10 Indictment. 

delivered to such court in due course of law ; and nothing in the said act 
shall extend or be applicable to prevent the presentment to or finding by 
a grand jury of any Dill of indictment, if such bill- be presented to the 
grand jury with the consent of the court in or before which the same may 
be preferred." See hereon, B. t. Brown [18951 1 Q. B. 119 ; 64 L. J. 
(M. C.) 1 ; 18 Cox, 81. This section is to be read with 22 <fe 23 Vict, c 17, 
for the purposes of 32 <fc 33 Vict. c. 62 {Debtors Act, 1869), s. 18. B. 
T. Bell, 12 Cox, 87, Montague Smith, J. The "consent of the court," 
mentioned in the last part of «. 1, is not a more formality, and if the court 
grants such consent without having before it materials on which it may 
exercise a discretion, the indictment, or any counts contained in it, pre- 
ferred in pursuance of such consent may be quashed. R. v. Bradlaugh, 
15 Cox, 156. But it is not necessary to obtain the consent of the court to 
tbe addition of counts for offences within the Vexatious Indictments Act 
before the bill is presented to the grand jury, if the facts on which the 
counts are founded appear upon the depositions. B. v. Clarke, 59 J. P. 
248, Collins, J. Semble, it is necessary so to obtain such consent where it 
is desired to prefer a fresh bill of indictment, whether it charge offences 
disclosed upon the depositions or not, as is the practice at the Central 
Criminal Court. Charges preferred before the justices on which they 
have refused to commit cannot be joined in an indictment with those on 
which the justices did commit, unless the prosecutor has been bound 
over as to the dismissed charges. B. v. Crabbe, 59 J. P. 247, Fulton, C. S. 
Where a count charging conspiracy to defraud based on evidence 
appearing on the depositions was added to counts charging perjury and 
conspiracy to commit perjury, the Court held the added count to be 
embarrassing, and refused to allow evidence to be given in support of it 
B. v. Harris, 64 /. P. 360, Qrantham, J. 

Costs of vexatious indictments.] — 30 <fc 31 Vict. c. 35, s. 2, provides that 
" whenever any bill of indictment shall be preferred to any grand jury, 
under the provisions of the Vexatious Indictments Act, 1859 (supra), against 
any person who has not been committed to or detained in custody or 
bound by recognizance to answer such an indictment, and the person 
accused thereby shall be acauitted thereon, it shall be lawful for the 
court before which such an indictment shall be tried, in its discretion, to 
direct and order that the prosecutor or other person by or at whose 
instance such indictment shall have been preferred shall pay unto the 
accused person the just and reasonable costs, charges and expenses of 
such accused person and his witnesses (if any) caused or occasioned by 
or consequent upon the preferring of such bill of indictment, to be taxed 
by the proper officer of the court ; and upon non-payment of such costs, 
charges and expenses within one calendar month after the date of such 
direction and order, it shall be lawful for any of the superior courts 
of law at Westminster (i.e. now of the High Court of Justice), or any 
judge thereof, or for the justices and judges of the Central Criminal 
Court (if the bill of indictment has been preferred in that Court), to issue 
against the person on whom such order is made such and the like writ or 
writs, process or processes as may now be lawfully issued by any of the 
said superior courts for enforcing judgment thereof." Whero the in- 
dictment is preferred to the grand jury by a private prosecutor, and a 
true bill found, and the director of public prosecutions afterwards under- 
takes the case, and on the trial the defendant is acquitted, no order can 
be made on such director for payment of the defendant's costs under 
this section, notwithstanding 42 & 43 Vict. c. 22, s. 7. Stiibbs v. Director 
of Public Prosecutions, 24 Q. B. D. 577; 17 Cox, 1. It seems doubtful, 



Against whom it lies. 11 

indeed, whether hi any case an order under 30 <fc 31 Vict, c. 35, s. 2, can 
be made on such director. It is very difficult to conceive what the 
circumstances could be which would justify such an order upon him. 
Id. Judgment of Cave, J., ad fin. As to costs see further, post, Book I. 
eh. ri. 



Ssor. 2. 

AGAINST WHOM AN INDICTMENT LIES. 

An indictment lies against all persons who actually commit, or who 
procure, or assist in, the commission of any crime, or who knowingly 
harbour a traitor or felon ; for each, in contemplation of law, is guilty, 
and liable to punishment according to the part which he takes in the 
perpetration or concealment of the offence. 

Number and gender.] — When a statute (whether passed before or after 
1850) creates or defines an offence punishable on indictment or on 
summary conviction, unless the contrary intention appears in the statute, 
words importing the masculine gender include females, and words in the 
singular include the plural, and words in the plural include the singular : 
1. 1 of the Interpretation Act, 1889 (52 <fc 53 Vict. c. 63, which re-enacts 
part of 7 <fc 8 Geo. 4, c. 28, s. 14)). 

Corporations.'] — By s. 2 (1) of the same Act "in the construction of 
every enactment relating to an offence punishable on indictment or 
summary conviction, whether contained in an Act passed before or 
after" January 1, 1890, "the expression 'person' shall, unless a con- 
trary intention appears, include a body corporate." See B. v. Tyler 
[1891] 2 Q. B. 583, 594, Bowen, L.J. A contrary intention would 
be inferred in the case of treason, felony, or misdemeanors involving 
personal violence : Pharmaceutical Society v. London & Provincial Supply 
Association, 5 App. Cos. 857, 869; 49 L. J. (Q. B.) 736; B. v. Great West 
foundry Co n 13 Manitoba, 66 : and in cases where the only penalty for 
the offence is imprisonment or corporal punishment. See Pearks Gunston 
A Tee ▼. Ward [1902], 2 K. B. 1, 11, Channell, J. : and a corporation 
aggregate has been held incapable of perjury. Wych v. Meal, 8 P. Wins. 
310; 24 Eng. Rep. 1078. But a corporation aggregate may be indictod, 
by their corporate name, for breaches of public duty, whether in the 
nature of nonfeasance, such as the non-repair of highways or bridges 
which it is their duty to repair : B. v. Birmingham & Gloucester Bail. Co., 
2Q.B.47; 9 C. <fc P. 469 ; or of misfeasance, such as the obstruction of 
a highway by a railway company in a manner not authorized by their 
act of parliament. B. v. Great North of England Bail. Co., 9 Q. B. 315 ; 
16 L. J. (M. C.) 16 : Att.-Gen. v. London A North Western Bail. Co. [1900j ; 
1 Q. B. 78. It would seem, also, that a corporation may be indicted by 
its corporate name, and fined, for a libel published by its order. See 
Pharmaceutical Society v. London <fe Provincial Supply Association, at 
p. 870, per Lord Blackburn : Eastern Counties Bail. Co. v. Broom, 6 Er, 
314: Whitfield V. South-Eastern Bail. Co., E. B. <fc E. 115 ; 27 L. J. (Q. B.) 
229- Trial of an indictment against a corporation cannot take place 
before a court of quarter sessions. See Certiorari, post, Book I. ch. i. s. 13. 

Capacity.] — The capacity to commit crime presupposes an act of under- 
standing and an exercise of will ; and " the full definition of every crime 
contains expressly or by implication a proposition as to a state of mind, 
la all cases whatever, competent age, sanity, and some degree of freedom 



12 Indictment* 

from coercion are assumed to be essential to criminality." R. v. ZV/wn, 
Q. B. D. 168, J87, Stephen, J. 

Degree* of Complicity. 4 ] — We proceed to consider the liability of the 
respective parties to an offence, and the several grounds of exemption 
from criminal liability, under the following heads :— 

Principals in (he first degree.]— The general definition of a principal in 
the first degree is, one who is the actor or actual perpeirator of the fact 

1 Hale, 233, 615. But it is not necessary that he should be actually 
present when the offence is consummated ; for if one lay poison purposely 
for another who takes it and is killed, he who laid the poison, though 
absent when it was taken, is a principal in the first degree. Vaux's case, 
4 Co. Rep. 44 b ; Fost. 319 : R. v. Harley, 4 C. <fc P. 369. Nor is it neces- 
sary that the act should be perpetrated with his own bands ; for if an 
offence be committed through the medium of an innocent agent, the 
employer, though absent when the act is done, is answerable as a principal 
in the first degree. See R. v. Giles, 1 Mood. C. C. 166 : R. v. Michael, 

2 Mood. C. C. 120; 9 C. & P. 356 : R. v. Mazeau, 9 C. <ft P. 676 : R. v. 
Bull, 1 Cox, 281 : R. v. Manley, Id. 104 : R. v. Clifford, 2 C. A K. 202 : 
R. v. Bleaidale, lb. 765 : R. v. Butt, 15 Cox, 564 (C. C. R.). Thus, if a 
child, under the age of discretion, or any other instrument excused from 
the responsibility of his actions by defect of understanding, ignorance of 
the fact, or other cause, be incited to the commission of murder or any 
other crime, the inciter, though absent when the fact was committed, is 
liable for the act of his agent, and a principal in the first degree. Fost. 
349 ; 1 Hawk. c. 31, s. 7 : R. v. Palmer, 1 B. d- P. (N. R.) 96 ; 2 Leach, 978 : 
R. v. Butcher, Bell, 6 ; 28 L. J. (M. C.) 14 ; 8 Cox, 77. But if the instru- 
ment be aware of the consequencos of his act, he is a principal in the 
first degree, and the employer, if he is absent when the fact is committed, 
is an accessory before the fact : R. v. Stewart, R. Jc R. 363 : R. v. 
Williams, 1 Den. 39 ; 1 C. cfc K. 589 ; or, if he be present, is a principal in 
the second degree ; Fost. 349 ; unless the instrument concur in the act 
merely for the purpose of detecting and punishing the employer, in which 
case he is considered to be an innocent agent. R. v. Bannen, 2 Mood. 
C. C. 809 ; 1 C. & K. 295 : R. v. Johnson, C. & Mar. 218. 

Principals in the second degree."] — Principals in the second degree are 
those who are present at the commission of the offence, and aid and abet 
its commission. 

A person may be a principal in the second degree oven if from sex or 
age incapable of being a principal in the first degree. R. v. Ram % 17 
Cox, 609, Bowen, L. J. : Lord Baltimore s case, 4 Burr. 2179 : R. v. Elder- 
thaw, 3 C. <fc P. 396. 

Presence, in this senso, is either actual or constructive. It is not 
necessary that the party should be actually present, an ear or eye-witness 
of the transaction ; he is, in construction of law, present, aiding and 
abetting, if, with the intention of giving assistance, he be near enough to 
afford it, should occasion arise. Thus, if he be outside the house, watch- 
ing, to prevent surprise, or the like, whilst his companions are in the house 
committing a felony, such constructive presence is sufficient to make him 
a principal in the second degree. Fost. 347, 850 ; 2 Hawk c. 29, ss. 7,8; 
1 Russ. Cr. (6th ed.) 162 ; 1 Hale, 555. See R. v. Borthwick. 1 Doug. 207 : 
Coalheavers' case, 1 Leach, 64 ; 1 East P. C. 343 : R. v. Gogerly, R.&R.843 : 
R. y. Owen, 1 Mood. C. C. 96. But he must be sufficiently near to give 
assistance ; R. v. Stewart, R. <fc R. 363 ; and the mere circumstance of a 



Degrees of Complicity: Principals. 13 

party going towards a place where a felony is to be committed, in order 
to assist to carry off the property, and assisting in carrying it off, will not 
make him a principal in the second degree, unless, at the time of the 
felonious taking, he was within such a distance as to be able to assist in it. 
fl. v. Kelly, R. & R. 421 ; 1 Russ. Or. (6th ed.) 164. So, where two persons 
broke open a warehouse, and stole thereout a quantity of butter, which 
they carried along the street thirty yards, and then fetched the prisoner, 
who, being apprised of the robbery, assisted in carrying away the property, 
it was held that he was not a principal, but only an accessory. R. v. King, 
B.&R.332L See R. v. M'Makin, R. & R. 333, n. : R. v. Dyer, 2 East, P.O. 
767. And although an act be committed in pursuance of a previous con- 
certed plan between the parties, those who are not present, or so near as 
to he able to afford aid and assistance at the time when the offence is 
committed, are not principals, but accessories before the fact. R. v. Soares, 
It. &R.25: R. v. Davis, Id. 113 : R. v. Else, Id. 142 : R. v. Radcock, Id. 
249 : B. v. Rune, 2 M . & Rob. 360 : R. v. Manners, 7 C.&P.8Q1: R. y. 
Howell, 9 C. &. P. 437 : 3 St. TV., N. S. 1087 : R. y. Tuckwell, C. <fc Mar. 
215. So, if one of them have been apprehended before the commission of 
the offence by the other, he can be considered only as an accessory before 
the fact R. v. Johnson, G. & Marl 218. But presence during the whole 
of the transaction is not necessary ; for instance, if several combine to 
forge an instrument, and each executes by himself a distinct part of the 
forgery, and they are not together when the instrument is completed, 
they are, nevertheless, all guilty as principals. R. v. Dinghy, R. & R. 
416 : R. y. AtweU, 2 East, P. 0. 768. As, if A. counsel B. to make the 
paper, C. to engrave the plate, and D. to fill up the names of a forged 
note, and they do so, each without knowing that the others are employed 
for that purpose, B., C, and D. may be indicted for the forgery, and A. 
as an accessory ; R. v. Dade, 1 Mood, C. 0. 307 ; for, if several make dis- 
tinct parts of a forged instrument, each is a principal, though he do not 
know by whom the other parts are executed, and though it is finished by 
one alone in the absence of the others. R. v. Kirkwood, 1 Mood. C. G. 304. 
See R. v. Kelly, 2 C. <& K. 379. " Although the prisoner might not be 
able to write himself, yet if he got any one to write the name, he is as 
much guilty of forgery as if he wrote it himself." R. v. James, 4 Cox, 
SO, Erie, J. 

There must also be a participation in the act ; for even if a man is 
present whilst a felony is committed, if he takes no part in it and does 
not act in concert with those who commit it, he will not be a principal 
in the second degree, merely because he did not endeavour to prevent the 
felony, or failed to apprehend the felon. 1 Hale, 439 ; Fost. 350. See post, 
Bool- II., Part I V., Misprision. It is not necessary, however, to prove that 
the party actually aided in the commission of the offence ; if he watched for 
his companions in order to prevent surprise, or remained at a convenient 
distance, in order to favour their escape, if necessary, or was in such a 
situation as to be able readily to come to their assistance, the knowledge 
of which was calculated to give additional confidence to his companions, 
ia contemplation of law, he was present aiding and abetting. So, a 
participation, the result of a concerted design to commit a specific offence, 
U sufficient to constitute a principal in the second degree. Thus, if 
sereral act in concert to steal a man's goods, and he is induced by fraud 
to trust one of them, in the presence of the others, with the possession 
of the good*, and then another of the party entices the owner away in 
order that he who has the goods may carry them off, all are guilty as 
principals. R. v. Standi ey, R. & R. 305; 1 Russ. Cr. (6th ed.) 167: 
A v. Bastty 7 C. & P. 282 : R. v. Lorhett, Id. 300. So it has been held, 



14 Indictment. 

that to aid and assist a person, to the jurors unknown, to obtain money 
by ring-dropping, is felony, if the jury find that the prisoner was 
confederate with the person unknown to obtain the money by means of the 
practice. B. v. Moore, 1 Leach, 314 : 2 East, P. C. 679. So, if two persons 
driving carriages incite each other to drive furiously, and one of them 
run over and kill a man, it is manslaughter in both. B. v. SwindaU, 
2 C. & K . 230 ; 2 Cox 141. So, also if three persons amuse themselves by 
shooting with a rifle at a target, without taking proper precautions to 
prevent injury to others, and one of the shots kills a man, all three are 
guilty of manslaughter, although there is no proof which of the three 
fired the fatal shot. B. v. Salmon, 6 Q. B. D. 79 ; 50 L. J. (M. C.) 25 : 
14 Cox 494. If one encourages another to commit suicide, and is present 
abetting him while he does so, such person is guilty of murder as a 
principal ; and if two persons encourage each other to self-murder, and 
one kills himself, but the other fails in the attempt, the latter is a 
principal in the murder of the other. B. v. Dyson, B. & B. 523; B. v. 
Alison, 8C.&P. 418 : B. v. Jessop, 16 Cox, 204, Field, J. ; B. v. Stormonlh, 
61 /. P. 729 ; Bidley, J. : B. v. Abbott, 67 J. P. 151, Kennedy, J. So, likewise, 
if several persons combine for an unlawful purpose, or for a purpose to 
be carried into effect by unlawful means ; see Fost. 351, 352 ; particularly, 
if it is to be carried into effect notwithstanding any opposition that may 
be offered against it ; Fost. 353, 354 ; and one of them, in the prosecution 
of it, kills a roan, it is murder in all who are present, whether they 
actually aid or abet or not (Sissinghurst-hottse case, 1 Bale, 462) provided 
that the death were caused by the act of some one of the party in the 
course of his endeavours to effect the common object of the assembly. 
1 Hawk. c. 31, s. 52 : B. v. Hodgson, 1 Leach, 6 : 1 East, P. C. 258 : 
B. v. Plummer, Kel. (J.) 109 : Fost 352. But it is not sufficient that the 
common purpose is merely unlawful : it must either be felonious, or, if it 
be to commit a misdemeanor, then there must be evidence to show that 
the parties engaged intended to carry it out at all hazards. B. v. SJceet, 
4F.&F. 931 : see B. v. Luck, 3 F. &F.4S8: B. v. Doddridge, 8 Cox, 335. 
And the act must be the result of the confederacy ; for, if several are 
out for the purpose of committing a felony, and, upon alarm and pursuit, 
run different ways, and one of them kills a pursuer to avoid being taken, 
the others are not to be considered as principals in that offence. B. v. 
White, B. & B. 99. Thus, where a gang of poachers, consisting of the 
prisoners and Williams, attacked a gamekeeper, beat him, and left him 
senseless upon the ground, but Williams returned, and whilst the 
gamekeeper was insensible upon the ground, took from him his gun, 
pocket-book, and money, Park, J., held that this was robbery in Williams 
only. B. v. Hawkins, S C.& P. 392. As to the proper directions to the 
jury in such a case, see B. v. Price, 8 Cox, 96, Byies, J. , The purpose 
must also be unlawful; for, if the original object is lawful, and be 
prosecuted by lawful means, should one of the party in the prosecution 
of it kill a man, although the party killing, and all those who actually aid 
and abet him in the act, may, according to circumstances, be guilty of 
murder or manslaughter, yet, the other persons who are present, and 
who do not actually aid and abet, are not guilty as principals in the 
second degree. Fost. 354, 355 ; 2 Hawk, c. 29, s. 9. 

A mere participation in the act, without a felonious participation in 
the design, will not be sufficient. 1 East, P. C. 258 : B. v. Plummer, 
Kel. (J.) 109. Thus, if a master assaults another with malice prepense, 
and the servant, ignorant of his master's felonious design, takes part with 
him and kills the other, it is only manslaughter in the servant, though if; 
is murder in the master. 1 Hale, 446. 



Degrees of Complicity : Accessories, 15 

Id the case of murder by duelling, both of the seconds are principals in 
the second degree, as they give aid and assistance by their countenance 
and encouragement of the principals in the first degree, the actual fighters. 
B. v. Youna, 8 CAP. 644: B. v. Cuddy, 1 C. A K. 210, although Lord 
Hale considered, that, as far as relates to the second of the party killed, 
the rule of law in this respect had been too far strained ; and he seems 
to doubt whether a second should bo deemed a principal in the second 
degree. 1 Hale, 452, 453. A prize-fight is illegal, and all persons present, 
aiding and abetting therein, are guilty of assault as principals in the 
second degree. B. v. Coney, 8 Q. B. D. 534; 51 L. J. (M. C.) 66. It was 
once held, that all persons present at a prize-fight, having gone thither 
with the purpose of seeing the prize-fighters strike each other, were 
principals in the breach of the peace, and guilty of an assault ; R. v. 
Perkins, 4C.AP. 537, Patteson, J. ; see R. v. Murphy, 6 C. A P. 103. But 
it is now settled that mere voluntary presence as spectators at a prize- 
fight, dees not as a matter of law necessarily render persons so present 
guilty of an assault as aiders and abettors of the fight : B. v. Coney. 
supra ; although, semhle, that the mere presence of a person, unexplained, 
at a prize-fight affords some evidence for the consideration of a jury of 
aiding and abetting in the fight. Id. 

If the principal was insane at the commission of the act, no person can 
be convicted as an aider and abettor of his act. B. v. Tyler, 8 CAP. 
616. In B. v. Coombes [1895] Cent. Crim. Ct., Wood-Benton on Lunacy, 
913, Kennedy, J., ruled that a man could not be convicted as accessory 
after the fact to a murder committed by an insane boy. It is submitted 
that in consequence of the alteration of the verdict in cases of insanity. 
by the Trial of Lunatics Act, 1883, (post, ch. v. Trial, etc.), these two rulings 
are not in accordance with the present law. And in B. v. Tyler, ubi supra, 
where an insane man collected together a number of persons, who armed 
themselves with a common purpose of resisting the lawful authorities, 
and in their presence he shot a peace-officer who came to apprehend him 
under a warrant, it was held that they were guilty of murder as principals 
in the first degree; and that no apprehension of personal danger to 
themselves from him furnished any excuse to them for assisting in his 
illegal acts. Cf McGrowther's case, Post 13, 217; 18 St. Tr. 391. 

Aiders and abettors were formerly defined to be accessories at the fact, 
and could not be tried until the principal had been convicted or outlawed. 
Post, 317. But it has long since been decided that all those who are 
present aiding and abetting when a felony is committed, are principals in 
the second degree, and may be arraigned and tried before the principal 
in the first degree has been found guilty; 2 Hale, 323; and may be 
convicted, though the party charged as principal in the first degree is 
acquitted. B. v. Taylor, 1 Leach, 860; 1 East, P. C. 351 : Banson v. Offley, 
2 Show, 510 ; 3 Mod. 121 : B. v. Wallis, 1 Salk. 334 : B. v. Towle, B. A B. 
314 ; 2 Marsh. 465 ; 3 Price, 145. 

In Stephen's Digest of the Criminal Law, p. 36 (5th ed.), it is laid down 
that principals in the second degree in felony, may in all cases be indicted 
as principals in the first degree. But where by particular statutes the 
punishment is different (of which it would be difficult now to find an 
instance), then principals in the second degree must be indicted specially 
as aiders and abettors. 1 East, P. C 348, 350 : B. v. Sterne, 1 Leach, 473 : 
2 East, P. C. 701. See, however, B. v. Manning, 2 C.& K. 903, n. If 
indicted as aiders and abettors, an indictment charging that A. gave the 
mortal blow, and that B., G. and D. were present aiding and abettinp, 
would be sustained by evidence that B. gave the blow, and that A., C. 
and D. were present aiding and abetting; and even if it appeared that 



16 Indictment, 

the act was committed by a person not named in the indictment, the 
aiders and abettors might nevertheless be convicted. R. v. Borthtvick, 1 
Doug. 207 ; 1 East, P. C. 350. See It. v. Swindall, 2 C. <fc K. 230 ; 2 Cox, 
141. And the legal result is the same even where the jury say that they 
are not satisfied which gave the blow, if they are satisfied that one of 
them did, and that the others were present aiding and abetting. R. v. 
Downing, 1 Den. 52 ; 2 C. & K . 382 : and see R. v. Salmon (ante, p. 14). Where 
a prisoner was convicted upon an indictment which charged him with 
rape as a principal in the first count, and as an aider and abettor in the 
second, it was held that the conviction upon the first count was good. 
R. v. Folkes, 1 Mood. C. C. 354 : R. v. Gray, 7 C. & P. 164. Ste R. v. 
Crisham, C. <fc Mar. 187 : R. v. Downing, supra. 

In treason, and in offences below felony, and in all felonies in which the 
punishment of principals in the first degree and of principals in the 
second degree is the same, the indictment may charge all who are present 
and abet the fact as principals in the first degree; 2 Hawk, c. 25, s. 64 : 
Machalleys ca*e, 9 Co. Rep. 67 b : R. v. Rogers, L. R. 1 C. C. R. 136 : 37 
L. J. (M. C.) 83 ; provided the offence permit of a participation ; Fost. 345 ; 
or specially as aiders and abettors. R. v. Crisham, supra. By the Acces- 
sories, etc Act, 1861 (24 & 25 Vict. c. 94), s. 8, u whoever shall aid, abet, 
counsel or procure the commission of any misdemeanor, whether the 
same be a misdemeanor at common law, or by virtue of any act passed or 
to be passed, shall be liable to be tried, indicted and punished as a 
principal offender." Where, therefore, upon the trial of an indictment 
charging A. with feloniously wounding, and B. with feloniously aiding 
and abetting him in the felony, the jury found A. guilty of unlawfully 
wounding, it was held that B. was properly convicted of aiding and 
abetting in the misdemeanor. R. v. Waudby [1895] 2 Q. B. 482; 64 L. J. 
(M. C.) 251 (C. C. R.). If the abettor and principal in a misdemeanor 
are indicted together as principals, the abettor may be convicted, although 
the principal is acquitted. R. v. Burton, 13 Cox, 71 (C. C. R.). 

Accessories be/ore the fact.]— An accessory before the fact is one who, 
though absent at the time of the felony committed, doth yet procure, 
counsel, command or abet another to commit a felony. 1 Bale, 615 : 
R. v. Macdaniel, 19 St. Tr. 745 ; Fost. 121. 

It is only in felonies that there can be accessories : in high treason, 
every instance of incitement, etc., which in felony would make a man 
an accessory before the fact, will make him a principal traitor; Fost. 
341—346 ; and he must be indicted as such. 1 Hale, 233. And, all those 
who in felony would be accessories before the fact, in offences under felony 
are principals and indictable as such. 4 Bl. Com. 36 : 1 Russ. Cr. (6th 
ed.) 174 : R. v. Clayton, IC.&K. 128: R. v. Moland, 2 Mood. C. C. 276 ; 
R. v. Greenwood, 2 Den. 453 ; 24 & 25 Vict. c. 94, s. 8, supra. 

If the party be actually or constructively present when the felony is 
committed, he is, as we have seen (ante, p. 12), an aider and abettor, and 
not an accessory before the fact; for it is essential, to constitute the offence 
of accessory, that the party should be absent at the time the offence is 
committed. 1 Bale, 615 : R. v. Gordon, 1 Leach, 515 ; 1 East, P. C. 315, 
352. Acting upon this rule, Lord Coleridge, C. J., directed the acquittal of a 
woman indicted as accessory before the fact to a murder, it being proved 
that she was present at the time when the murder was committed, and was 
therefore liable, if at all, as a principal. R. v. Brown, 14 Cox, 144. 

The procurement may be personal, or through the intervention of a 
third person ; Fost. 125 : R. v. Earl of Somerset, 2 St. Tr. 965, 19 St. Tr. 
801, cit. : i?. v. Cooper, 5C.<fc P. 535. 



Degrees of Complicity: Accessories. 17 

It may also be direct, by hire, counsel, command, or conspiracy : or 
indirect, by evincing an express liking, approbation, or assent to another's 
felonious design of committing a felony ; 2 Hawk. c. 29, s. 16 ; bat the bare 
concealment of a felony to be committed will not make the party con* 
coaling it an accessory before the fact ; 2 Hawk. c. 29, s. 23 ; nor will a tacit 
acquiescence, or words which amount to a bare permission, bo sufficient 
to constitute this offence. 1 Halt, 616. 

The procurement must be continuing : for if the procurer of a felony 

Xts, and before the felony is committed, actually countermands his 
, and the principal notwithstanding commits the felony, the original 
contriver will not be an accessory. 1 Hale, 618. 

If the accessory orders or advises one crime, and the principal inten- 
tionally commits another ; as, for instance, if he is ordered or advised to 
born a house, and instead thereof commits larceny; or, to commit a crime 
against A., and instead of so doing commits the same against B., — the 
accessory will not be answerable; 1 Hale, 617; but if the principal commits 
the same offence against B. by mistake, instead of A., it seems it would be 
otherwise. Fost. 370 et seq. ; but see 1 Hale, 617 ; 3 Co. Inst. 51. But it 
is clear that the accessory is liable for all that ensues upon the execution 
of the unlawful act commanded ; as, for instance, if A. commands B. to 
heat C, and he beats him so that he dies, A. is accessory to the murder. 
4 Bl. Com, 37 ; 1 Hale, 617. Or if A. commands B. to burn the house of 
C, and in doing so the house of D. is also burnt, A. is accessory to the 
borning of D.'s house. B. v. Saunders, Plowd. 473. So, if the offence 
commanded is in fact committed, although by different means from those 
commanded : as, for instance, if J. W. hires J. S. to poison A., and instead 
of poisoning him, he shoots him, J. W. is, nevertheless, liable as accessory. 
Fost. 369, 370. Where the procurement is through an intermediate agent, 
it is not necessary that the accessory should name the person to be pro- 
cored to do the act. B. v. Cooper, 5 C. & P. 535. If the agent is innocent 
the person procuring his act is a principal and not an accessory. It. v. 
Bull, 1 Cox, 281 : B. v. Manley, 1 Cox, 104 ; 1 Buss. O. (6th ed.) 165. 

To support an indictment for being accessory before the fact, there 
must be some active proceeding on the part of the defendant ; i.e. he must 
procure, incite, or in some other way encourage the act done by the 
principal. Therefore where T. acted as stakeholder on the occasion of a 
prize-fight which ended in the death of one of the fighters, but was not 
present at the fight and took no other part in the circumstances attending 
it than to hold the stakes and afterwards hand them over to the winner, 
it was held that he was not liable to be convicted as accessory before the 
feet to the manslaughter. B. v. Taylor, L. B. 2 C. C. B. 147 ; 44 L. J 
{M. C.) 67 ; 13 Cox, 68. 

Several persons may be convicted on a joint charge against them as 
accessories before the fact to a particular felony, though the only evidence 
against them is of separate acts done by each at separate times and places. 
B. v. Barber, 1C.&K.442. 

In manslaughter, it has been said, there can be no accessories before the 
tact, for the offence is sudden and unpremeditated ; and therefore where 
A. is indicted for murder, and B. as accessory, if the jury find A. guilty of 
manslaughter, they must acquit B. 1 Hale, 437, 466, 615 ; 1 Hawk. c. 30, 
i. 2. This doctrine rests on Bibithe's case, 4 Co. Bep. 43 6. : Qoose % s case, Moore, 
461 : Qoff v. Byby, Cro. Eliz. 540 ; and is controverted by the late Mr. 
Greaves, Crim. Cons. Acts (1st ed.), p. 23. And where a man procured and 
gave a woman poison in order that she might take it and so procure 
abortion, and she did take it in his absence, and died of its effects, it was 
held that he might be convicted as an accessory before the fact to the crime 
ajojp. 2 



18 Indictment. 

of manslaughter. B. v. Gaylor, Dean. & B. 288 ; 7 Car, 253. In the 
course of the argument in that case, Bramwell, B., said, " Suppose a man 
for mischief gives another a strong dose of medicine, not intending any 
further injury than to cause him to be sick and uncomfortable, and death 
ensues, would not that be manslaughter ? Suppose, then, that another 
had counselled him to do it, would not he who counselled be an accessory 
before the fact ? " 

At common law an accessory could not, without his own consent, unless 
tried with the principal, be brought to trial until the guilt of his principal 
had been legally ascertained by conviction (1 Anne, st. 2, c. 9, s. 1, rep.) or 
outlawry. Ploivden, 97 : Fost. 360 : 1 Hale, 623. But under the Acces- 
sories, etc., Act, 1861 (24 <fc 26 Vict. c. 94, s. 2), " whosoever shall counsel, 
procure, or command any other person to commit any felony, whether the 
same be a felony at common law, or by virtue of any Act passed or to be 
passed, shall be guilty of felony, and may be indicted and convicted either 
as an accessory before the fact to the principal felony together with the 
principal felon, or after the conviction of the principal felon, or may be 
indicted and convicted of a substantive felony, whether the principal 
felon shall or shall not have been previously convicted, or shall or shall 
not be amenable to justice, and may thereupon be punished in the same 
manner as any accessory before the fact to the same felony if convicted as 
an accessory may be punished/ 9 An indictment will not lie under this 
section where no felony is in fact committed. B. v. Gregory, L. B. 
1 C. C. B. 77; 36 L. J. (M. 0.) 60. "No person who shall be once duly 
tried, either as an accessory before or after the fact, or for a substantive 
felony (under the provisions hereinbefore contained), shall be liable to 
be afterwards prosecuted for the same offence." Id. $. 7. And " if any 
principal offender shall be in anywise convicted of any felony, it shall be 
lawful to proceed against any accessory, either before or after the fact, in 
the same manner as if such principal felon had been attainted thereof, 
notwithstanding such principal felon shall die, or be pardoned, or other- 
wise delivered before attainder; and every such accessory shall upon 
conviction suffer the same punishment as he would have suffered if the 
principal had been attainted." Id. s. 5. 8. 2 only applies where the 
accessory might at common law have been indicted with, or after the con- 
viction of, the principal. And where a defendant was indicted as an 
accessory before the fact to the murder of S. W., who had by his pro- 
curement killed herself, it was held that a like statute did not apply. 
B. v. Russell, 1 Mood. C. C. 356 : B. v. Leddington, 9 C. & P. 79. But by 
s. 1 it is enacted, that " whosoever shall become an accessory before the 
fact to any felony, whether the same be a felony at common law or by 
virtue of any Act passed or to be passed, may be indicted, tried, con- 
victed, and punished in all respects as if he were a principal felon " : so 
that the conviction of the principal is not now in any sense a condition 
precedent to the conviction of the accessory. B. v. Hughes, Bell, 242 ; 
29 L. J. (M. C.) 71. In B. v. Chadwick, Stafford Sum. Ass. 1850, the 
prisoner was inaicted as a principal for murder by arsenic, and the jury 
found that he procured the arsenic, and caused it to be administered by 
another person, but was absent when it was administered ; and thereupon 
it was objected that 11 <£ 12 Vict. c. 46, s. 1 (rep.), which is similar to 
24 <fe 25 Vict. c. 94, s. 1, did not apply to murder, but Williams, J., over- 
ruled the objection and refused to reserve the point Greaves' Criminal 
Law Acts (2nd ed.), p. 20. A person who induces a servant of the poet- 
office to intercept and hand over to him a letter, which is in course of 
transmission by post, is either guilty, together with the poat-offloe servant, 
of larceny as a principal, or is accessory before the met to the larceny 



Degrees of Complicity: Accessories. 19 

committed by the poet-office servant, aud in either view cm bo convicted 
on an indictment charging him with larceny of tho letter. R. v. James, 
21 Q. B.D.439; 59 L. J. (M. C.) 96. He was a joint thief with the post- 
man from whom he obtained the letter, or he was an accessory before the 
fact, in which case, by 24 & 25 Vict, c 94, s. 1, he was liable to be convicted 
in all respects as if he were a principal felon, per Lord Coleridge, J., Id. 
Where the principal and accessory are tried together, one being charged 
as principal and the other as accessory before the fact (which will now, 
probably, never occur), if the principal plead otherwise than the general 
issue, the accessory shall not be bound to answer until the principal's plea 
be first determined. 9 H. 7, c. 19 (rep.): 1 Hale, 624: 2 Co. Inst. 184. 
Where the principal was indicted for burglary and larceny in a dwelling- 
house, and the accessory was charged in the same indictment as accessory 
before the feci to the said "felony and burglary" and the jury acquitted 
the principal of the burglary, but found him guilty of the larceny ; it 
seems the judges were of opinion that the accessory should have been 
acquitted ; for tho indictment charged him as accessory to the burglary 
only, and the principal being acquitted of that, the accessory should have 
been acquitted also. R. v. Donnelly, R. & R. 310; 2 Marsh. 571. And 
24 £ 25 Vict, c 94, «. 6, enacts that " any number of accessories at different 
times to any felony, and any number of receivers at different times of 
property stolen at one time, may be charged with substantive felonies in 
the same indictment, and may be tried together, notwithstanding the 
principal felon shall not be included in the same indictment, or shall not 
he in custody or amenable to justice. 1 ' 

If a man be indicted as accessory to several persons in the same felony, 
and be found accessory to one, it is a good verdict, and judgment may be 
passed upon him. R. v. Lord Sanckar, 9 Co. Rep. 119 ; Fost. 361 ; 1 Hale, 
621. 

Incitement.] — The soliciting and inciting a peraon to commit a felony, 
where no felony is in fact committed by the person so solicited, still 
remains a misdemeanor only, notwithstanding 21 <& 25 Vict, c 94, s. 2 
(ante, p. 18). R. Gregory, L. R. 1 C. C. R. 77 ; 36 L. J. (M. C.) 60. 

Accessories after the fact.}- In high treason there are no accessories after 
the fact, those who in felony would be accessories after the fact being 
principals in high treason (ante, -p. 16) ; yet in their progress to conviction 
they must be treated as accessories, and indicted specially for the receipt, 
etc., and not as principal traitors. 1 Hale, 238. So, in offences under 
felony there are no accessories after the fact ; 1 Hale, 613 ; although, if 
the act of the receiver amount to a rescue, or to obstructing an officer of 
justice in the execution of his duty, or the like, he would undoubtedly be 
indictable for it as for a misdemeanor. 2 Hawk. c. 29, s. 4 : 1 Buss. Cr. (6th 
ed.) 164. An accessory after the fact is one who, knowing a felony to 
have been committed by another, receives, relieves, comforts, or assists 
the felon, 3 Co. Inst. 138 : 1 Hale, 618 : 4 Bl. Com. 37 : Fost. 373 : 2 
Hawk, c 29, a. 1 : 1 Russ. Cr. (6th ed.) 176 : R. v. Burridge, 3 P. Wms. 
439, 475 ; 24 Eng. Rep. 1133, 1146. Any assistance given to one known 
to be a felon, in order to hinder his apprehension, trial, or punishment, is 
sufficient to make a man an accessory after the fact ; as, for instance, that 
he concealed him in the house ; Dolt. c. 161 ; or shut the door against 
his pursuers, until he should have an opportunity of escaping ; 1 Hale* 
619 ; or took money from him to allow him to escape ; Y.B.d H. 4, pi. 1 $ 
er supplied him with money, a horse, or other necessaries, in order to 
enable him to escape ; Hale's Sum. 218 : 2 Hawk. c. 29, s. 26 ; or that the 



20 Indictment. 

principal being in prison, J. W. bribed the gaoler to let him escape, or 
conveyed instruments to him to enable him to break prison and escape. 
1 Hale, 621. 

Bnt merely Buffering the principal to escape will not make the party 
an accessory after the fact ; for it amounts at most bnt to a mere omission. 
• F. B. H. 4, pl.l.l Bale, 619 : and see post. Book 11, . Part 1 V n Misprision. 
So, if a person supply a felon in prison with victuals or other necessaries 
for his sustenance ; 1 Hale, 620 ; or relieve and maintain him if he be bailed 
out of prison ; Id. ; or if a physician or surgeon professionally attend a felon 
sick or wounded, although he know him to be a felon ; 1 Hale, 332 ; or 
if a person speak or write in order to obtain a felon's pardon or deliver- 
ance ; 26 An. 47 ; or advise his friends to write to the witnesses not to 
appear against him at his trial, and they write accordingly ; 8 Co. Inst. 
139 : 1 Hale, 621 ; or even if he himself agree, for money, not to give 
evidence against the felon ; Moore 8 ; or know of the felony and do not 
discover it ; 1 Hale, 871, 618 ; none of these acts would be sufficient to 
make the party an accessory after the fact. He must be proved to have 
done some act to assist the felon personally. It. v. Chappie, 9 C. &P. 
855. But if he employ another person to do so, he will be equally guilty 
as if he harboured or relieved him himself. B. v. Jar vis f 2 M. & Bob. 40. 

A wife is not punishable as accessory for receiving, etc., her husband, 
although she knew him to have committed felony ; 1 Hale, 48,621 : B. v. 
Manning, 2 C. & K. 903, n. ; for she is presumed to act under his coercion. 
See post, p. 30. But no other relation of persons can excuse the wilful 
receipt or assistance of felons ; a father cannot assist his child, a child hfe 
parent, a husband his wife, a brother his brother, a master his servant, or 
a servant his master. Id. Even one may make himself an accessory after 
the fact to a larceny of his own goods, or to a robbery on himself, by 
harbouring the thief, or assisting in his escape. Fost. 123 : Cromp. 41 b, 
jri. 4 <& 5. If the wife alone, the husband being ignorant of it, receive any 
other person being a felon, the wife is accessory, and not the husband. 1 
Hale, 621. And if the husband and wife both receive a felon knowingly, 
it shall be adjudged only the act of the husband, and the wife shall be 
acquitted. Id. 

To constitute this offence, it is necessary that the accessory at the time 
when he assists or comforts the felon, should have notice, direct or implied, 
that he had committed a felony. 2 Hawk. c. 29, s. 32. It is also necessary 
that the felony should be complete at the time the assistance is given ; 
for, if one wound another mortally, and after the wound given, but before 
death ensues, a person assists or receives the delinquent, this does not 
make him accessory to the homicide ; for until death ensues no murder 
or manslaughter is committed. 2 Hawk. c. 29, s. 35 : 4 Ul. Com. 38. 

Accessories after the fact could not until 1848 (11 <fc 12 Vict. c. 46), except 
with their consent, be tried before the conviction of their principal. 1 
Hale, 623 : 2 Hawk. c. 29, *. 45. But they might be tried with their 
principal ; 1 Hale, 628 ; or separately after the principal had been con- 
victed : and having been once duly tried, they could not be again indicted 
or tried for the same offence. 7 O. 4, c. 64, «. 10 (rep.) The Accessories and 
Abettors Act, 1861 (24 & 25 Vict. c. 94), s. 3, which re-enacts 11 <fc 12 Vict, 
c. 46, 8. 2, provides that " whosoever shall become an accessory after the 
fact to any felony, whether the same be a felony at common law or by 
virtue of any Act passed or to be passed, may be indicted or convicted 
either as an accessory after the fact to the principal felony, together with 
the principal felon, or after the conviction of the principal felon, or may 
be indicted and convicted of a substantive felony, whether tho principal 
felon shall or shall not have been previously convicted, or shall or shall 



Exemptions and Excuses. 21 

not be amenable to justice, and may thereupon be punished in like manner 
as any accessory after the met to the same felony, if convicted as an 
accessory, may be punished ; " i&. under 24 <fc 25 Vict, c 94, a. 6, or any 
special statute dealing with the offence) " provided that no person who 
shall be once duly tried either as an accessory after the fact or for a 
substantive felony, shall be liable to be afterwards prosecuted for the 
same offence. 1 ' Id. s. 7. See also s. 5, ante, p. 18. 

On an indictment charging a man as a principal felon only, he cannot 
be convicted of the offence of being an accessory after the fact. B. v. 
Fallon, L. <t- C. 217;. 32 L. J. (M. C.) 66: Richards v. J?., 66 L. J. 
Q. B. 459 ; 61 J. P. 389. Where several persons are tried upon one indict- 
ment, some as principals in murder, others as accessories after the fact 
to the murder, and the principals are convicted of manslaughter only, 
the persons charged as accessories may be convicted as accessories to the 
manslaughter. B. v. Richards, 2 Q. B. D. 311 ; 46 L. J. (M. C.) 200 ; 
13 Cox, 611 ((7. C. B.). 

As to the joinder of several accessories after the fact in the same 
indictment, see 24 <fc 25 Vict, c 94, s. 6 (ante, p. 19). 

The receipt of stolen goods did not at common law constitute the 
receiver an accessory, bat was a distinct misdemeanor, punishable by 
fine and imprisonment ; 1 Hale, 620 ; and although by several statutes, 
receivers were made accessories after the fact, and by 7 & 8 Q. 4 c. 29 
(rtp.y, ss, 54, 55, 60, might in certain cases be indicted either as acces- 
sories after the feot to felony, or for a substantive felony, or might be 
prosecuted for a misdemeanor, or punished upon summary conviction : 
[tec now 24 <fc 25 Vict. c. 96, ss. 91, 93, 95, 97:) yet the receipt of stolen 
goods is still a distinct and separate offence, and as such will be considered 
hereafter. 

Misprision.'] — It is a misdemeanor at common law for any person who 
knows that another has committed a felony to conceal or procure the 
concealment thereof. See Steph. Dig. Cr. Law (5 th od.) 122, 401: 3 Co. 
Inst. 140 : 1 Hate, 374 ; and see post, Book II. Part I V.> Accessories. 

Exemptions and Excuses. 

Aliens.] — British statutes are not construed to apply to acts of aliens on 
land outside the King's dominions or at sea except within territorial 
waters, or on British ships, or in cases of piracy jure gentium. 

A British subject cannot naturalize himself as a subject of a foreign 
state at war with this country so as to exempt himself for criminal 
liability for treason. B. v. Lynch [1903] 1 K. B. 444: 20 Cox, 468 : 67 «T. P. 41. 

An alien friend is subject to indictment for offences committed in 
England (R. v. Esop, 1 C.&P. 456: B. v. Barronet, 1E.&B.1-, 22 L. J. 
(M. C.) 25), or upon British ships within the admiralty jurisdiction (see 
post, p. 39), and for piracy jure gentium. Att.-Qen. of Hong Kong v. 
Kwok a Sing, L. B. 5 P. C. 179, 199 : 1 Hawk. c. 17, s. 5. This liabiuty 
appears not to extend to aliens who have diplomatic immunity. See 
Diplomatic Privileges Act, 1708 (7 Anne, c. 12): Law Mag. and Review 
{Nov. 1894), p. 43. Sed contra, see case of Pantaleon Sa t 5 St. Tr. 461 ; 
and cf. 2 St. Tr. 881, n. ; Fost. 187. The burden of proof that the accused 
is an alien appears to lie upon him. See B. v. Lindsay, 14 St. Tr. 987, 
994 : B. v. Macdonald, 18 St. Tr. 857 ; excopt perhaps where the offence 
is committed outside the realm : but see B. v. Jameson [1894] 2 Q. B. 425 ; 
" 65 L. J. (M. C.) 218. The liability of an alien enemy is not clearly 
ascertained. See B. v. Moliercs, Fost. 188, n. : B. v. Johnson, 6 East, 583, 
593; 8 B. B. 550, Ellenborough, LC.J.; 1 Hawk. c. 17, s 6. 



22 Indictment. 

Infants.']^— It is a general rule, that infante under the age of discretion 
are not punishable by any criminal prosecution whatever; 1 Hale, 27: 
1 Hawk. c. 1, 8. 1 : Mirror, c. 4, *. 16 (Selden Soc. Publ., vol. 7) ; but the 
age of discretion, by the law of England, varies according to the nature 
of the offence. 

Infant* under seven.] — An infant under the age of seven years cannot be 
guilty of felony, or bo punished for any capital offence ; for, under that 
age an infant is, by incontrovertible presumption of law, doli ineapax, 
and cannot be endowed with any discretion. Beg. 309 b : 1 Hale, 27, 28 : 
4 Bl. Com. 23 : Mirr. c. 4. a. 6 : Fost. 349: Beniger v. Fogossa, Plowd. 1, 
19:*i?. v. Carter [1774] 1 Cowp. 220, 223: Marsh v. Loader, 14 C. B., 
N. S. 535. This rule is recognized in & 10 (5) of the Summary Juris- 
diction Act, 1879 (42 <fe 43 Vict. c. 49). 

Infants under fourteen.] — Between the age of seven and fourteen years 
an infant is presumed to be doli ineapax ; but this presumption is not 
incontrovertible and may be rebutted by strong and pregnant evidence of 
a mischievous discretion, expressed in the maxim malitia supplet mtaiem; 
for the capacity to commit crime, do evil and contract guilt, is not so 
much measured by years and days, as by the strength of the delinquent's 
understanding and judgment. 4 Bl. Com. 23 : 1 Bale, 25, 27. Thus, it 
is said that an infant eight years of age may be indicted for murder, and 
shall be hanged for it ; Dolt. c. 147 ; and an infant between the age of 
eight and nine years was executed for arson, it appearing that he was 
actuated by malice and revenge, and had perpetrated the offence with 
craft and cunning. 1 Hale, 25 n. So a girl of thirteen was burnt for 
killing her mistress; 1 Hale, 26 ; and where an infant nine years of age 
killed an infant of the like age, and confessed the felony, it appearing 
upon examination that he had hid both the blood and the body, the 
justices were of opinion that he might lawfully be hanged, but respited 
the judgment that he might be pardoned. Fitz. Cor. 57. See B. v. York, 
Fost. 70; 4 Bl. Com. 24; B. v. Wild, 1 Mood. C. C. 452. But in cases of 
this nature the evidence of a mischievous discretion, to rebut the prima 
facie presumption of law arising from nonage, should be clear and strong 
beyond all doubt and contradiction. 4 Bl. Com. 23 : 1 Hale, 25, 27 : B. 
v. Vamplew, 3 F. & F. 520. Where a child between the age of seven and 
fourteen years is indicted for felony, two questions are to be left to the 
jury : first, whether he committed the offence ; and secondly, whether at 
the time he had a guilty knowledge that he was doing wrong. B. v. 
Owen, 4 C. & P. 236 : R. v. Smith, 1 Cox, 260. The fact that the child 
did the acts constituting the elements of the offence is not in itself any 
evidence whatever of the guilty state of mind which is essential for con- 
viction. R. v. Kershaw, 18 T. L. B. 357, 37 L. J. N. 120 ; Bucknill, J m 
An infant under fourteen is presumed by law to be unable to commit a 
rape, and therefore cannot be found guilty of it; for though in other 
felonies malitia supplet mtatem, yet, as to this particular act, the law pre- 
sumes him impotent, as well as wanting in discretion. This presumption 
was not affected by 9 O. 4, c. 31, ss. 16, 17 (rep.), which first made the offence 
complete upon proof of penetration, without evidence of emission ; B. v. 
Oroombridge, 7 C. & P. 582; nor by the present enactment, 24 <fc 25 Vict, 
c. 100, s. 63, by which 9 G. 4, c. 31, is superseded : B. v. Waite [18921 2 O. 
B. 600 ; 61 L. J. (if. C.) 189 ; 17 Cox, 554. Nor is any evidence admis- 
sible to show that the defendant had in fact arrived at the full state of 
puberty, and could commit the offence. B. v. Philips, 8 C. & P. 736 : 
B. v. Jordan, 9 (7, <fc P. 118 : B. v. Brimilow, Id. 366; 2 Mood. C. V. 122. 



Defence of Infancy. 23 

In R. v. Brimifow it was held that the boy had been properly convicted 
of an assault under 1 Vict. c. 85, s. 11 (rep.). Nor can a boy under fourteen 
be convicted of an assault with intent to commit a rape. B. v. Elder thaw, 
3 C. & P. 396. This doctrine has been extended to other offences involv- 
ing carnal knowledge. B. v. Watte, ubi supra. But a boy under fourteen 
may be a principal in the second degree in a rape, or like offence, if he 
aid and assist in the commission of the offence, and it appears that he 
bad a mischievous discretion ; for the excuse of impotenoy will not in 
aoch ease apply. 1 Hale, 630 : B. v. Eldershaw, SO. <fe P. 396. See B. v. 
AUen,lDen.3te; 2 C. & J5T.869; 18 L. J. (M. C.)72; 8 Cox, 270: B.v. 
Williams [1893] 1 Q. B. 320 ; 62 L. J. (M.C.) 69. 

In JL v. Sutton, 3 A. & E. 597, 5 N. <fe M . 353, there are dicta to the 
effect that under certain circumstances an infant under fourteen might 
be liable to indictment in respect of pnblio duties arising out of his 
occupation of property. See post, tit. Highways. 

Infants over fourteen^] — The incapacity of infants to commit crime ceases 
upon their attaining the age of fourteen years, at which age they are 
presumed by the law to be doli capaces, and capable of discerning good 
from evil, and are, with respect to their criminal actions, subject to the 
same rule of construction as others of more mature age. 1 Hale, 25 ; 
Loct. and Stu. c 26 ; Co. Lilt. 79, 171, 247 ; Dalt.c.U7; lHawk.c.l,n.(l). 

In some misdemeanors and offences which are not capital an infant is 
said to be privileged by reason of his nonage, if under twenty-one, because 
laches is not to be attributed to him. Co. Lilt. 357 ; 4 Bl. Com. 22. But 
inasmuch as an infant is liable in tort, it is difficult to understand the 
grounds of this early distinction, as to misdemeanors, when an infant over 
seven could be liable for felony. And an infant who is indicted for any 
notorious breach of the peace, as riot, forcible entry, battery, or for perjury 
or cheating, or the like, is equally liable as a person of full age ; because, 
upon his trial, the court, ex officio, ought to consider whether he was doli 
cam, and had discretion to do the act with which he is charged. 1 Hale, 
p,2l; 4 BL Com. 22 ; 3 Bac Abr., Infancy (H.). An infant, though 
incapable of making a contract of bailment, has been held liable to 
indictment for larceny as bailee. B. v. AT Donald, 15 Q. B. D. 323. But 
an infant cannot lawfully be adjudicated bankrupt, and consequently 
cannot be convicted of an offence under s. 12 of the Debtors Act, 1869 
(32 <fc 33 Vict. c. 62), which depends on the existence of bankruptcy and 
the existence of valid debts by the infant. B. v. Wilson, 5 Q. B. D. 28 ; 
49 L. J. (M. C.) 13 : Lovell v. Beauchamp [1894] App. Cos. 607. 

Summary remedy.'] — Under the Summary Jurisdiction Act, 1879 (42 <fc 
43 Vict. c. 49), power is given to try summarily for any indictable offence 
committed in England except homicide, a child over seven and under 
twelve if the child's parent or guardian consent to this course (0. 10), and 
for certain indictable offences a person over twelve bnt under sixteen, if 
the youthful offender consents (s. 11). Similar provisions are made as to 
offences in Ireland by 47 & 48 Vict. c. 19, ss. 4, 6, 7, 9, as amended by 
1 Edw. 7, c. 20, s. 14. 

Persona of unsound mind.] — Every person at the age of discretion is, 
unless the contrary be proved, presumed by law to be sane, and to be 
accountable for his actions. B. v. Oxford, 4 St. Tr., N. S. 497 ; 9 O. <fc P. 
525 : B. v. Stokes, 3 C. <fc K. 185 : B. v. Layton, 4 Cox, 149. The pre- 
sumption in probate cases is the other way, as the person propounding 
the will must prove the testator competent. Banks v. Gmdfclhw, L. B. 



24 Indictment. 

5 Q. B. 549. And a grand jury ought not to ignore a bill of indictment 
on the ground of the insanity of the accused. B. v. Hodges, 8 C.& P. 195. 
fiat if there be an incapacity, or defect of the understanding, as there can 
be no consent of the will, the act cannot be culpable. 

This specie* of non-volition is classified by Coke (Litt. 247) and Hale (1 
Hist. P. C. 29) as either natural, accidental, or affected; it is either 
perpetual or temporary ; and is by thera reduced to three general heads : 
1. A nalivitate, vd dementia naturalis ; 2. Dementia occidentalism vel advert- 
titia ; 3. Dementia affectata. 

1. Dementia naturalis is idiocy, or natural fatuity. An idiot is one 
who is of non-sane memory from his birth, by a perpetual infirmity, 
without lucid intervals : Co. Litt. 247 ; and those are said to be idiots 
who cannot number twenty, or tell the days of the week, who do not 
know their fathers or mothers, or the like ; but these instances are men- 
tioned as tests of insanity only, and are not always conclusive; and 
although idiocy or natural fatuity is in general sufficiently apparent, the 
question, whether idiot or not, is a question of fact triable by a jury. 
Bac. Ah\, Idiot (A) ; Bro. Abr., Idiot, 4, and ought to be clearly made 
out, in order to exempt the accused from punishment. B. v. Arnold, 16 
St. Tr. 695, 704; 1 Buss. Cr. (6th ed.) 121. A person deaf and dumb 
from his birth, who has no means of learning to discriminate between 
right and wrong, or of understanding the penal enactments of the law, as 
applicable to particular offences, is an idiot ; but if it can be shown that 
he has the use of understanding, which many of that condition discover 
by 6ign8, then he may be tried, convicted, and presumed to be punished, 
although great caution should be observed in such proceedings. 1 Hale, 
34 ; Moore, 4, pi. 12 ; Fitzh. N. B. 233. See B. v. Jones, 1 Leach, 102 : B. 
V. Steel, Id. 451 : B. V. Dyson [1831] Parke, J., York Spring Ass., 7 C. <fc P. 
£05 n. ; Matthews' Dig. 4i0 : B. v. Pritchard, 7 C. <fc P. 303 : B. v. Berry, 
1 Q. B. D. 447 ; 45 L. J. (M. C.) 123 ; 13 Cox, 187. 

2. Adventitious insanity, or dementia accidentalis, proceeds from various 
causes, and is of several kinds or degrees ; it is either partial (an insanity 
upon some one subject, the party being sane upon all others), or total ; 
permanent (usually called madness), or temporary (the object of it being 
afflicted with bis disorder at certain periods and vicissitudes only, 
with lucid intervals), which is usually denominated lunacy. 3 Bac. 
Abr. 16. 

The distinction between lunacy and madness made by Hale and Coke 
is not now observed, and the one word " insanity " covers both classes of 
mental aberration. 

In the Lunacy Act, 1890 (53 Vict. c. 5) " lunatic" is defined as meaning 
an idiot or person of unsound mind (s. 341). 

But the tests applied for the purpose of that act aro not the same as 
the tests of insanity from the point of view of criminal responsibility : 
See Wood-Benton on Lunacy, 5. 

3. Dementia affectata. See Drunkenness, post, p. 29. 

Where the deprivation of understanding and memory is total, fixed 
and permanent, it excuses all acts ; so likewise a man labouring under 
adventitious insanity is, during the frenzy, entitled to the same induU 
gence, in the same degree with one whose disorder is fixed and perma- 
nent. Beverley's case, 4 Co. Bep. 125 ; Co. Litt. 247 ; 1 Hale, 31. But 
difficulty arises in distinguishing between a total aberration of intellect 
and a partial or temporary delusion merely, notwithstanding which the 
patient may be capable of discerning right from wrong ; in which case 
he will be guilty in the eye of the law, and amenable to punishment. 
Partial insanity, says Lord Hale, is the condition of many, especially of 



Defence of Lunacy. 25 

melancholy persons, who generally discover their defects in excessive 
fear and grief; and yet are not wholly destitute of the use of reason ; and 
this partial insanity seems not to excuse them in the commission of any 
crime. 1 Bale, 30. Doubtless, he adds, most persons that are felons of 
themselves, and others, are under a degree of partial insanity when they 
commit these offences ; it is very difficult to define the invisible line that 
divides perfect from partial insanity ; but it must rest upon circumstances 
duly to be weighed and considered both by the judge and the jury, lest, 
on the one side, there be a kind of inhumanity towards the defects of 
human nature, or, on the other side, too great an indulgence given to 
great crimes. He concludes by suggesting, as the best measure, that such 
a person as, labouring under melancholy distempers, hath yet a* great 
understanding as ordinarily a child of fourteen years hath, is such a 
person as can be guilty of treason or felony. 1 Bale, 30, 412. 

Considerable uncertainty has been shown by the judges as to the appli- 
cation or acceptance of Lord Bales rules. In R. v. Arnold, 16 St. Tr. 
695, 764, and R. v. Earl Ferrers, 19 Si. Tr. 885, it was ruled that a 
man cannot be acquitted on the ground of insanity unless he is totally 
deprived of understanding and memory, and does not know what he is 
domg any more than an infant or a brute or wild beast. In R. v. Bad- 
field, 27 St. Tr. 1281, the test accepted was, if a man bo completely 
deranged so that he knows not what he does, if he be lost to all sense 
tbat he cannot distinguish good from evil, and cannot judge of the con- 
sequences of his actions, then he cannot bo guilty of crime, because the 
will, which to a certain extent is the essence of every crime, is wanting. 
In R. v. Bcllingham, Coll. Lun. 636, add., and R. v. Bowltr, Id. 673, the 
test applied was whether, when the act was done, tbe prisoner was 
capable of distinguishing right from wrong and was under the influence 
of any delusion which rendered his mind insensible of the act. Cf R. 
v. Parker, Jd. 477. And in R. v. Oxford, 4 St. Tr., N. S. 497 ; 9 0. & P. 
525, the ruling was in substance the same. In R. v. Offord, 5 C. <fe P. 
168, it was ruled, that, to excuse a man from punishment upon the 
ground of insanity, it must bo proved distinctly that he was not capable 
of distinguishing right from wrong at the time he did the act, and did 
not know it to be an offence against the laws of God and nature. The 
rule now generally adopted is based on the answers of the judges to the 
H. L. givon in consequence of Macnaughlons cote, 4 St. Tr., §. S. 847 ; 
10 CI. <fc -F. 200; 8 Eng. Rep. 718. 'lindal, C.J., at tbo trial directed tho 
jury : " If upon balancing tbe evidence in your minds you should think 
the prisoner a person capable of distinguishing right from wrong with 
respect to the act of which he stands charged, he is then a responsible 
agent." This involves the proposition that if there be a partial degree 
of reason, a competent use of it sufficient to have restrained those 
passions which produce the crime ; if there be thought and design, a 
faculty to distinguish the nature of actions, to discern the difference 
between moral good and evil,— then he will be responsible for his actions. 
See R. t. Bigginson, 1 C. <fe K . 129. On this direction the jury returned 
a verdict of not guilty. In consequence of the direction and verdict a 
discussion took place in the Bouse of Lords, and a series of questions 
were propounded to and answered by the judges, in relation to the law 
respecting alleged crimes committed by persons afflicted with insane 
delusions. Below, are given the questions asked of the judges and the 
answers of all except Maule, J., who gave on his own account a more 
qualified answer. 

Question 1. — " What is the law respecting alleged crimes committed by 
persons afflicted with insane delusion in respect of one or more particular 



26 Indictment. 

subjects or persons : as, for instance, where at the time of the commission 
of the alleged crime the accused knew he was acting contrary to law, but 
did the act complained of with a view, under the influence of insane 
delusion, of redressing or revenging some supposed grievance or in jury, 
or of producing some public benefit ? " 

Answer. — "Assuming that your lordships' inquiries are confined to 
those persons who labour under such partial delusions only, and are not 
in other respects insane, we are of opinion, that, notwithstanding the 

Sarty did the act complained of with a view, under the influence of insane 
elusion, of redressing or revenging some supposed grievance or injury, or of 
producing some public benefit, he is nevertheless panisbable, according to 
the nature of the crime committed, if he knew, at the time of committing 
such crime, that be was acting contrary to law, by which expression we 
understand your lordships to mean the law of the land." (4 St. Tr., 
N. S. 930.) The words italicized appear to have special reference to the 
cases of Hadfidd, Bellingham, and Macnaughton. 

Question 2. — " What are the proper questions to be submitted to the 
jury when a person alleged to be afflicted with insane delusion respecting 
one or more particular subjects or persons, is charged with the commission 
of a crime, (murder, for example,) and insanity is set up as a defence ? " 

Question 3. — " In what terms ought the question to be left to the jury as 
to the prisoner's state of mind at the time when the act was committed ? " 

Answers. — To the second and third questions :— "That the jury ought 
to be told in all cases that every man is presumed to be sane, and to 
possess a sufficient degree of reason to be responsible for his crimes, 
until the contrary be proved to their satisfaction ; and that, to establish a 
defence on the ground of insanity, it must be clearly proved that, at the 
time of the committing of the act, the party accused was labouring under 
such a defect of reason, from disease of the mind, as not to know the 
nature and quality of the act he was doing, or, if he did know it, that he 
did not know he was doing what was wrong. The mode of putting the 
latter part of the question to the jury on these occasions has generally 
been, whether the accused, at the time of doing the ad, knew the difference 
between right and wrong, which mode, though rarely, if ever, leading to 
any mistake with the jury, is not, as we conceive, so accurate when put 
generally, and in the abstract, as when put as to the party's knowledge 
of right and wrong in respect to the very act with which he is charged. 
If the question were to be put as to the knowledge of the accused, solely 
and exclusively with reference to the law of the land, it might tend to 
confound the jury, by inducing them to believe that an actual know- 
ledge of the law of the land was essential in order to lead to a conviction, 
whereas the law is administered upon the principle that every one most 
be taken conclusively to know it without proof that he does know it If 
the accused was conscious that the act was one which he ought not to 
do, and if that act was at the same time contrary to the law of the land, 
he is punishable ; and the usual course, therefore, has been to leave the 
question to the jury, whether the party accused had a sufficient degree 
of reason to know that he was doing an act that was wrong : and this 
course, we think, is correct, accompanied with such observations and 
explanations as the circumstances of each particular case may require." 
4 St. Tr., N. 8. 931. The words italicised appear to distinguish between 
the physical character and legal aspect of the act done. See Mayne, Ind. 
Cr. Law [ed. 1896] p. 378. 

Question 4. — " If a person, under an insane delusion, as to the existing 
facts, commits an offence in consequence thereof, is he thereby excused ? " 

Answer.—" The answer must, of course, depend on the nature of the 



Defence of Lunacy. 27 

delusion ; bat making the same assumption as we did before, that he 
labours under such partial delusion only, and is not in other respects 
inane, we think he must he considered in the same situation as to respon- 
sibility as if the facts with respect to which the delusion exists were real. 
Far example, if, under the influence of his delusion, he supposes another 
man to be in the act of attempting to take away his life, ana he kills that 
man, as he supposes in self-oefence, he would be exempt from punish- 
ment If his delusion was that the deceased had inflicted a serious 
injury to his character and fortune, and he killed him in revenge for such 
supposed injury, he would be liable to punishment'' 4 St. Tr., N. 8. 932. 
Sec R. v. Townley, 3 F. & F. 839. 

Question 5. — "Can a medical man, conversant with the disease of 
insanity, who never saw the prisoner previously to the trial, but who was 
present during the whole trial, and the examination of all the witnesses, 
be asked his opinion as to the state of the prisoner's mind at the time of 
the commission of the alleged crime, or his opinion whether the prisoner 
was conscious, at the time of doing the act, that he was acting contrary 
to law, or whether he was labouring under any and what delusion at the 
time?" 

Answer. — " We think the medical man, under the circumstances 
supposed, cannot in strictness be asked his opinion in the terms above 
stated, because each of those questions involves the determination of 
the truth of the facts deposed to, which it is for the jary to decide : and 
the questions are not mere questions upon a matter of science, in which 
ease such evidence is admissible. But where the facts are admitted or 
not disputed, and the question becomes substantially one of science only, 
it may be convenient to allow the question to be put in that general 
form, though the same cannot be insisted on as a matter of right." 
4 St. Tr^ N. 8. 932. 

These answers have in the main been accepted as laving down the law 
as to the definition of insanity with reference to criminal responsibility. 
R. t. Townley, 3 F. A F. 839 : R. v. JSouthey, 4 F. <fc F. 864: R. v. Leigh, 
4 F.& F. 915. But they have been the subject of much consideration 
and criticism by legal and medical writers. (Set, 2 Stephen, Hist. Or. Law, 
124-186; Mayne, Ind. Crim. Law (ed. 1896), pp. 368, 390; Wood-Benton 
on Lunacy, 885, 914.) Sir James Stephen came to the conclusion (2 Hist. 
Cr m Law, 186) that Mactiaughton f s ease admitted, as a farther exemption, 
the proposition " that a person should not be punished for any act when 
he is deprived by disease of the power of controlling his conduct, unless 
the absence of control has been caused by his own default. 1 ' So far as 
this admits the medical theory of uncontrollable impulse, it conflicts with 
the following cases : R. v. Stokes, 3 C. & K. 185, Rolfe % B. : R. v. Barton, 
3 Cox, 275, Parke, B. : R. v. Burton, S F. & F. 772, Wightman, J. : R. v. 
Dove [1884], Bramwell, B. ; 3 Steph. Hist. Or. Law, 429: Wood-Renton, 
Lunacy, 900; and with the opinions of the judges appointed to report on 
the Draft Code of 1878 ; but it is supported as a legal proposition by dicta 
of Dentnan, L.CJ., in B. v. Oxford, 9 0. & P. 525 ; Mellor, J., in R. v. Cock- 
croft, Taylor, Med. Jurisp. p. 788 ; and Lawrance, J., in R. v. Duncan, 
Wood-Benton, Lunacy, 901, 908 ; and see Take, Diet. Psych. Med. vol. 1, p. 
314 ; Journal of Mental Science, vol. 43, p. 420 (a). 

(a) Colonial and American Views.]— The tendency of judges and legislators in the 

Vmited State* and the British Colonies is not to accept the dicta in Macnaugktorfs 

case ss an adequate definition of insanity with reference to criminal responsibility. 

Jn the QtuenMamd Code of 1899 ('. 27), drafted by the Rt. Hon. Sir Samuel Griffith, 

r*j ^ AUm* rutSamr after consideration of the English authorities and Continental 

aodAmoSinle^^tioth * he ricw of 8ir J - Stephen is in substance adopted. The 



28 Indictment, 

Moral insanity — i.e., disorder of the moral rather than of the mental 
powers— when a man's intellectual faculties are sound and he knows 
quite well what he is doing, but his moral sense is affected or diseased, 
is not yet accepted in England as falling within the rules in Macmughton's 
case. B. v. Haynts, 1 F. & F. 666 ; B. t. Law, 2 F. <fc F. 836 {and gee 
Wood-Benton, Lunacy, 909) : B. v. Burton, ZF.AF. 772. 

Proof of Insanity."]— "Whether the prisoner were sane or insane at the 
time the act was committed is a question of fact triable by the jury, and 
dependent upon the previous and contemporaneous acts of the party. 
Evidence of insanity of ancestors or blood relations is admissible. B. v. 
Tucket, 1 Cox, 103 : B. v. Vyse, 3 F & F. 247. So is evidence of illness 
exhausting the brain. B. v. Law, 2 F. & F. 836. Medical evidence is 
not essential, B. y. Dart, 14 Cox, 143. Mere absence of any evidence of 
motive for a crime is not a sufficient ground upon which to infer mania. 
B. v. Haynes, 1 F. <fc F. 666, Bramwell, B. : B. v. Dixon, 11 Cox, 341. 
Upon a question of insanity, a witness of medical skill may be asked 
whether, assuming certain facts, proved by other witnesses, to be true, 
they, in his opinion, indicate insanity, but not whether, having heard the 
whole evidence, he is of opinion that the prisoner at the time he committed 
the alleged act was of unsound mind. Id. B. v. Frances, 4 Cox, 57, 
Alderson B., and Crtsswelt, J. : B. v. Wright, B. & B. 456 : B. v. Searle, 1 
M. & Bob. 75. But a medical witnesp, who never saw the prisoner 
previously to the trial, but who was present during the whole trial and 
the examination of the witnesses, cannot, in strictness, be asked his 
opinion as to the state of the prisoner's mind at the time of the commis- 
sion of the alleged crime, or his opinion whether the prisoner was conscious, 
at the time of doing the act, that he was acting contrary to law, or whether 
he was labouring under any and what delusion at the time, because each 
of these questions involves the determination of the truth of the matter 
deposed to, which it is for the jury to decide. (See the answer to the fifth 
question in B. v. Macnaughton, supra.) Nor can such a witness, although 
present in court during the whole trial, be asked whether, from the 
evidence ho has heard, he is of opinion that the prisoner at the time ho 
did the act was insane, nor whether the act with which the prisoner ia 
charged was in his opinion an act of insanity, for these are the vory 

article runs : " A person is not criminally responsible for an act or omission if at the 
time of doing the act or making the omission he is in such a state of mental disease 
or natnral mental infirmity as to deprive him of capacity tD understand what he is 
doing or of capacity to control his actions, or of capacity to know that he ought not to 
do the act* or make the omission." 

And in the case of R. v. Hay [1899], 16 Cape of Good Hope, Rep. Sup. Ct. 290, the 
Rt. Hon. Sir H. de Villi ere, C. J., after hearing a full argument dealing with the law 
of England and the United States and the Roman-Dutch law, laid down as the law of 
the Cape, and as the tendency of legal opinion elsewhere, the following rules which 
also in substance coincide with the opinion of Sir J. Stephen : — 

" (1) Where the defence of insanity is interposed in a criminal trial the capacity to 
distinguish between right and wrong is not the sole test of responsibility in 
all cases. 
" (2) In the absence of legislation to the contrary courts of law are bound to 
recognize the existence of a form of mental disease which prevents the 
sufferer from controlling his conduct and choosing between right and 
wrong, though he may have the mental capacity to distinguish between 
right and wrong. 
" (3) The defence of insanity is established if it be proved that the accused had by 
reason of such mental disease lost the power of will to control his conduct 
in reference to the particular act charged as an offence. 
" (4) The capacity of the accused to control his own conduct must be presumed till 
(he contrary is proved." 



Defence of Drunkenness. 29 

points to be decided by the jury. R. v. Frances, ubi supra : R. v. Wright, 
ubi supra. Counsel will not be allowed, upon a question of insanity, to 
quote in his address to the jury the opinions of medical writers as 
expressed in their books. R. v. Crouch, 1 Cox, 94 : R. v. Taylor, 13 Cox, 
77, Brett, J. As to the mode of ascertaining judicially the facts of 
insanity, see post, ch. v., s. 1, Arraignment ; ch. v. s. 8, Trial. 

Drunkenness.] — Drunkenness, which produces a perfect though tem- 
porary frenzy or insanity, usually denominated dementia affectata, or 
acquired madness, was formerly held not to excuse the commission of 
any crime; and an offender under the influence of intoxication could 
derive no privilege from a madness voluntarily contracted, and was 
regarded as equally answerable to the law as if he had been in the full 
possession of his faculties at the time ; 1 Hale, 32 : Co. Litt. 247 : 1 Hawk, 
c 1, s. 6. But legal opinion has altered on this subject, and it has been 
ruled that upon an indictment for murder the intoxication of the de- 
fendant may be taken into consideration, as a circumstance to show that 
the act was not premeditated. R. v. Grindley, 1 Buss. Cr. (6th ed.) 144 : 
R. v. Pearson, 2 Lewin, 144 : R. v. Thomas, 7 CAP. 817. The same has 
been held in cases of attempts to commit suicide. R. v. Moore, 3 C.& K. 
319 : R. v. Doody, 6 Cox, 463. But there are contrary rulings in R. v. 
Carroll, 1 C. & P. 145 : R. v. Meakin, Id. 237. When the crime alleged 
is such that the intention of the accused is one of its constituent elements, 
the jury may look at the fact that he was in drink in considering whether 
he formed the intent necessary to constitute the crime; R. v. Doherty, 
36 Cox, 306, Stephen, J. : R. v. Cruse, 8 C. & P. 541, 546, Patteson, J. : 
Montgomery Election Petition, Day's Election Cases, 151, Wills, J. See also 
J?, v. Monkhouse,^ Cox, 55 : R. v. Moore, 3 C. & K. 319 (a). And drunken- 
ness and consequent delusions may assist to make out a defence of 
provocation or self-defence. R. v. Thomas, ubi supra : R. v. Pearson, ubi 
supra: R. v. Monkhouse, ubi supra: R. v. Qamlen, 1 F. & F. 93. The 
Scotch and Irish rulings on this subject are collected in Wood-Renton on 
Lunacy, 912, 913. If the primary cause of the frenzy be involuntary, or 
it have become habitual and confirmed, this species of insanity will excuse 
the offender to the same extent as any other form of insanity. Thus, for 
instance, if a man through the unskil fulness of his physician, or the con- 
trivance of his enemies, take that which produces a temporary frenzy, he 
will not, whilst under the influence of the frenzy, be accountable for his 
actions. So neither will he be liable to be punished for any crime perpe- 
trated under the influence of insanity which is habitual and fixed, though 
caused by frequent intoxication, and originally contracted by his own act. 
1 Hale, 32. And delirium tremens, caused by drinking, if it produces 
such a degree of madness, although only temporary, as to render a person 
incapable of distinguishing right from wrong, relieves him from criminal 
responsibility for any act committed by him while under its influence. 
R. t. Davis, 14 Cox, 563, Stephen, J. This doctrine has been in one case 
extended to temporary derangement occasioned by drink : R. v. Raines, 
Liverpool Assizes [1886] (noted in Wood-Renton on Lunacy, 912), in which 
case Day, J., dissented from the contrary view expressed by Holroyd, J., 
in R. v. Barrow, 1 Lewin, 75, and R. v. Rennie, 1 Lewin, 76. 

(a) See R. r. Egan [1897] 23 Vict. L. R. 159, as to whether and when a woman can be 
eoxmcted of murder or manslaughter by overlaying her child when she has taken it 
to bed with her while she is drunk. In R. v. Glen, 9 Queensland L. J. 140, a verdict 
of guilty coupled with a rider that the prisoner was in drink and did not know 
what he was doing was held to be a finding that he had no animus furandi. In 
JLr. CorbeU [1903] Queensland St. Rep. 246, Griffith, C.J., said, " Drunkeness is never 
a defence unless it amounts to unsoundness of mind." 



30 Indictment 

By the Inebriates Ad, 1898 (61 <fc 62 Vict. c. 60), it is enacted (s. 1, 
sub-s. 1) that " where a person is convicted on indictmont of an offence 
punishable with imprisonment or penal servitude (i.e., of any non-capital 
felony and most misdemeanors), if the court is satisfied from the evidence 
that the offence was committed under the influence of drink, or that 
drunkenness was a contributing cause of the offence, and the offender 
admits that he is or is found by the jury to be a habitual drunkard, the 
court may, in addition to, or in substitution for any other sentence, order 
that he be detained in any State inebriate reformatory, or in any certified 
inebriate reformatory, the managers of which are willing to receive him." 
The procedure under the act, and the provisions as to reformatories, are 
dealt with so far as relevant to the purposes of this work, post, under 
Punishment, and Offences after Previous Convictions. The act of 1898 is 
to be read as one with the Inebriates Acts of 1879 and 1888 («. 29). The 
term habitual drunkard is defined by s. 8 of the Inebriates Act, 1879 
(42 <ft 43 Vid. c 19), as meaning " a person who, not being amenable to 
any jurisdiction in lunacy, is notwithstanding, by reason of habitual 
intemperate drinking of intoxicating liquor, at times dangerous to him- 
self or herself or to others, or incapable of managing himself or herself, 
and his or her affairs." The definition appears to apply only to the 
habitual use of alcohol, and not to include the use of narcotics. See 
Wood Benton, Lunacy, 954. The act of 1898 does not appear to accept 
the view that drunkenness falling short of insanity is a defence on a 
charge of crime, but gives the courts latitude in treatment of crimes 
directly or indirectly due to drunkenness, by permitting the reformative 
sentence as an alternative to the ordinary punishment for a crime. The 
doctrine of criminal responsibility in case of drunkenness due to alcohol 
is equally applicable to mental or bodily conditions caused by the drink- 
ing of narcotics or non-alcoholic stimulants, or exciting drugs, or their 
hypodermic injection. 1 Hale, 82. 

Compulsion or coercion.'] — The same principle which excuses those who 
have no mental will in the perpetration of an offence, protects from the 
punishment of the law those who commit crimes in subjection to the 
power of others, and not as the result of an uncontrolled free action 
proceeding from themselves. 4 Bl. Com. 27 : 1 Hale, 44, 51. Thus, if A. 
by force take the hand of B. in which is a weapon, and therewith kill C, 
A. is guilty of murder, but B. is excused ; but if merely a moral force 
be used, as threats, duress of imprisonment, or even an assault to the 
peril of his life, in order to compel him to kill C, it is no legal excuse. 
1 Hale, 434; 1 East, P. C. 225. M'Growther's case, Fost. 18: 18 St. 2Y\ 
391 : B. v. Gordon, 1 East, P. C. 71 : B. v. Tyler, 8 C. & P. 616. This 
protection also exists in the publio and private relations of society: 
public, as between subject and prince, obedience to existing laws being 
a sufficient extenuation of civil guilt before a municipal tribunal ; and 

Srivate, proceeding from the matrimonial subjection of the wife to the 
usband, from which the law presumes a coercion, which, in many cases, 
excuses the wife from the consequence of criminal misconduct The 
private relations which exist between parent and child, and master and 
servant, will not, however, excuse or extenuate the commission of any 
crime, of whatever denomination ; for the command is void in law, and 
can protect neither the commander nor the instrument. 1 Hale, 44, 516. 
Obedience to usurped power is an excuse only where actual physical 
compulsion is used or directly available. See M*Grrowthers case, ttli 
supra : Sir H. Vane's case, 6 St. T?\ 119 ; Kel., (J.), 14 : AxtelVs case, 
Kel., (J.), 13. 



Defence of Coercion. 31 

The mere fact that two persons jointly charged with crime are married 
does not create any presumption that the wife was coerced by the 
husband to commit the crime. Brown v. Att.-Gen. of N. Z. [1898] App. 
Gas. 234, 237 ; 67 L. J. (P. C.) 7 : B. v. Mary Baines [1900] 69 L. J. 
Q. B. 631 : 19 Cox, 524 : 64 J. P. 408. But, as a general rale, if a crime 
be committed by a feme couverte in the presence of her husband, the law 
presumes that she acted under his immediate coercion, and excuses her 
from punishment; 1 Hale, 45, 516; I Hawk. c. 1, s. 9. This protection, 
however, is not to be allowed in crimes which are mala in se, and pro* 
hfbited by the law of nature, nor in such as are heinous in their character, 
or dangerous in their consequences ; 1 Hale, 45, 47, 48 ; 1 Hawk. c. 1, *. 11 ; 
4 HI. Com. 29 ; 1 Harg. St. Tr. 28 : B. v. Squires, 1 Buss. Or. (6th ed.) 151. 
It seems not to apply to murder, B. v. Manning, 2 C. <fc K. 903, n. : B. v. 
.Alison, 8 C. & P. 418 ; but has been applied to burglary and larceny (P. y. 
Knight, 1 C. & P. 116); to forgery (B. v. Hughes, 2 Lewin, 229) ; to 
felonious assaults (P. v. Smith, Dears. & B. 553); and to robbery 
(2?. y. Torpey, 12 Cox, 45). In some cases the presumption has been 
extended to misdemeanors: e.g. uttering base coin, B. v. Connolly, 
2 Lewin, 229 ; Matthews' Dig. 262 : B. y. Price, 8 C. & P. 19 ; and see 
R. y. Torpey, ubi supra. But Ihe contrary appears to have been held by 
all the judges in B. y. Cruse, 8 C. & P. 541; 2 Mood. C. C. 53; and this 
is the prevailing opinion. See B. v. Ingram, 1 Salk. 384. So a married 
woman may be indicted jointly with her husband for keeping a bawdy- 
house, B. y. Williams, 10 Mod. 63 ; 1 Salk. 384 ; or a gaming-house* 
R m y. Dixon, 10 Mod. 335 ; for these are offences connected with the 
government of the house, in which the wife has a principal share, 
1 Hawk. c. 1, s. 12. So, they may be jointly convicted of an assault. 
R. y. Cruse, supra. But if, in the absence of her husband, the wife 
commit an offence ; even by his order or'procurement, her coverture will 
be no excuse; Anon^2 East, P. C. 559: B.v.Morris, B. &P.270; 2 Leach, 
1096; 1 Hawk, c. 1, s. 11; even though he appear at the vory moment 
after the commission of the offence ; and no subsequent act of his, though 
it may render him an accessory to the felony of his wife, can be referred 
to what was done by his wife in his absence. B. v. Hughes, 1 Buss. Cr. 
(6th ed.) 153; 2 Lewin, 229. This presumption of coercion of the wife 
by the husband, may be rebutted by evidence; though it is doubtful 
whether a confession by a wife in presence of her husband should be 
received as such evidence. B. v. Laugher, 2 C. & K. 225. And if it 
appear that the wife was principally instrumental in the commission of 
the crime, acting voluntarily, and not by constraint of her husband, 
although he was present and concurred, she will be guilty and liable to 
punishment 1 Hale, 516 : B. y. Cohen, 11 Cox, 99 ; 16 W. B. 941 : B. y. 
Torpey, ubi supra. Thus, a married woman who swore falsely that she 
was next of kin to a person dying intestate, and so procured adminis- 
tration to the effects, was held responsible for the offence, though her 
husband was with her when she took the oath. B. v. Dicks, 1 Buss. Cn 
(6th ed.) 147. So where a husband delivered a threatening letter 
ignorantly, as the agent of the wife, she alone was held to be punishable. 
B. v. Hammond, 1 Leach, 447. And where the wife in the absence of her 
husband induced the prosecutor by false representations to meet her at 
a place, where the husband, the wife being present but taking no active 
part, by threats of violence induced the prosecutor to execute a valuable 
security, and the husband and wife were jointly indicted for that offence 
under 24 <fc 25 Vict. e. 96, «. 48, Brett, J., directed the jury that if they 
should be of opinion that the wife in the husband's absence took an 
independent part in carrying out the crime, the fact of her being the 



32 Indictment, 

wife would not absolve her. R. v. t/bAn, 13 Cox, 100. Where stolen 
goods are received by a married woman in the absence of her husband, 
and are concealed in his house, without his knowledge, she may be 
indicted and punished for the offence ; bat if the husband's ignorance of 
the transaction be not satisfactorily proved, the law will, in most cases, 
impute the receiving to him. Dalt. c 157. Where husband and wife 
were convicted jointly of receiving stolen goods, it was held that the 
conviction of the wife could not be supported, though she had been more 
active than her husband, because it had not been left to the jury to say 
whether she received the goods in the absence of her husband. R. v. 
Archer, 1 Mood. C. C. 143 : R. v. Matthews, 1 Den. 596 : 4 Cox, 214 : 
R. v. McClarens, 3 Cox, 425. See R. v. Wdrdroper, Bell, 249 ; 29 L. J. 
(M. C.) 116. But in R. v. Mary Baines (69 L. J. Q. B. 681 ; 19 Cox, 524 ; 
64 J. P. 406), where a husband and wife were jointly indicted for 
receiving stolen goods, and there was evidence of a separate receiving by 
the wife in the absence of her husband, it was held that she was properly 
convicted in accordance with the provisions of 24 <& 25 Vict. c. 96, s. 94. 
And it is submitted that a married woman is indictable for receiving 
since the Married Women's Property Act, 1882 (45 <fr 46 Vict. c. 75), if she 
knowingly deals with goods stolen by her husband in a business carried 
on by her under her own name. Husband and wife were jointly charged 
with felonious wounding, with intent to disfigure, and to do grievous 
bodily harm. The jury found that the wife acted under the coercion of 
the husband, and that she did not personally inflict any violence on the 
prosecutor. On this finding the wife was held entitled to an acquittal. 
R. v. Smith, Dears. & B. 553 ; 27 L. J. (M. C.) 204. And where the 
prisoner, a married woman, was indicted together with her husband, who 
was not in custody, for a robbery with violence, in which she had herself 
taken a very active part, and the jnry returned as their verdict that they 
were of opinion that the whole matter was pre-arranged by the husband, 
and that the wife acted under his coercion and control at the timo, this 
was held to amount to a verdict of not guilty. R. v. Torpey, 12 Cox, 45. 
Where upon an indictment for robbery with violence, D. and his wife 
were found guilty, the jury finding, however, that the wife had acted 
under her husband's compulsion, this was held to amount to a verdict 
of not guilty as to the wife. R. v. Dykes, 15 Cox, 771, Stephen* J. 
Husband ana wife cannot alone be found guilty of a conspiracy, for they 
are considered in law as one person, and are presumed to have but one 
will. 1 Hawk. c. 72, s. 8. 

If a married woman incite her husband to the commission of a felony, 
she is an accessory before the fact ; 1 Hale, 516 ; 2 Hawk, e. 29, «. 34 : 
R. y. Manning, 2 C. & K. 903, n. ; but she cannot be treated as an 
accessory for receiving her husband, knowing that he has committed 
treason or felony; 1 Hale, 47: R. v. Ooode, 1 C. & K. 185; nor for 
concealing a felon jointly with her husband ; Id. ; 1 Hawk. c. 1, s. 10 ; nor 
(before the Married Woman's Property Act, 1882, supra) for receiving 
from her husband goods stolen by him. R. v. Brooks, Dears. 184; 
22 L. J. (M. C.) 121. See R. v. Archer, 1 Mood. C. C. 143. And she 
will not be answerable for her husband's breach of duty, however fatal, 
though she be privy to his misconduct, if no duty be cast upon her, 
and she is merely passive. R. v. Squires, 1 Russ. Cr. (6th ed.} 151. 

If a married woman, indicted jointly with her husband, be described in 
the indictment as his wife, she need not prove her marriage, but will be 
entitled to protection if it appear that she acted under his coercion - 
R. v. Knight, 1 C. <fc P. 116 ; but the mere description will be no ground 
for dismissing the indictment as to the wife, for the indictment is joint 



Defence of Ignorance, etc. 33 

and several, according to the facts as they may appear. 1 Hale, 46. If 
she be described as a single woman, she mast prove her marriage ; B. v. 
Jones, Kel. (J.) 37 ; and such evidence must be given as will satisfy the 
jury of her marriage, although it is not absolutely necessary that the 
actual marriage should be proved. B. v. Atkinson, 1 Buss. Cr. (6th ed.) 
159 : B. v. Hassall, 2 C. & P. 434 : B. v. Woodward, 8 C. & P. 561 : B. v. 
McGinnes, 11 Cox % 391. Evidence of cohabitation and reputation will be 
sufficient Morris v. Miller, 4 Burr. 2057, Lord Mansfield, J. 

Ignorance of law."]— Ignorance of the law will not excuse from the 
consequences of guilt any person who has capacity to understand the law. 
1 Hale, 42 : B. v. Crawshaw, Bell, 303 ; 30 L. J. (M. C.) 58 ; 8 Cox, 375. 
If the offence be committed in England, a foreigner cannot be excused 
because he does not know the law. B. v. Esop, 7 C. & P. 456 : B. v. 
Barronet, 1 E. db B. 1 ; 22 L. J. (if. C.) 25. And the same if it be committed 
in an English ship on the high seas, which is in law part of the territory 
of England. B. v. Lopez, B. v. Saitler, Dears. & B. 525 ; 27 L. J. (M. C.) 
48. Where, however, a defendant was indicted for maliciously shooting 
at A. B. upon tho high seas, and the offence was perpetrated within a few 
weeks after the passing of 39 Q. 3, c. 37, and before notice of it could have 
reached the place where the offence was committed, the judges held, that 
as he could not have been tried before that act passed, and as he could not 
have heard of it, he ought to bo pardoned. B. v. Bailey, B.&B.l : and 
%et Burns v. Novell, 5 Q. B. D. 414, 454. 

Ignorance or mistake of fact."] — Ignorance or mistake of fact jnay in 
some cases be allowed as an excuse for the inadvertent commission of a 
crime, where the accused acted under an honest and reasonable belief in 
a state of things which if true would have justified the act done. " At 
common law an honest and reasonable belief in the existence of facts, 
which if true would make the act for which the prisoner is indicted an 
innocent act, has always been held to be a good defence. This doctrine is 
embodied in the somewhat uncouth maxim, actus non/acit reum nisi mens 
sit rea. Honest and reasonable mistake stands in fact on the same footing 
as absence of the reasoning faculty as in infancy, or perversion of that 
faculty as in lunacy." B. v. Tolson, 23 Q. B. D. 168, 181, Cave, J. For 
instance, if a man, intending to kill a thief in his own house, kill one of 
his own family, he will be guilty of no offence. 1 Hale, 42, 43 ; 4 Bl. Com. 
27; B. v. Levett, Cro. Car. 538 cit. But this rule proceeds upon a sup* 
position that; the original intention was lawful ; for if an unforeseen conse- 
quence ensue from an act which was in itself unlawful, and its original 
nature wrong and mischievous, the actor is criminally responsible for 
whatever consequence may ensue. 4 Bl. Com. 27. 

u Mcns raz."(a)] — The general rule of law is that a person cannot bo 
convicted in a proceeding of a criminal nature unless it can be shown 
that he had a guilty mind ; Chisholm v. Doulton, 22 Q. B. D. 736 ; 58 

(a) As to statutory offences the true rale of English law seems to be correctly stated 
in Ail 28 of the Queensland Code of 1899, except as to public nuisances. 
m " Subject to the express provisions of this Code relating to negligent acts and omis- 
sions, a person is not criminally responsible for an act or omission which occurs inde- 
pendently of the exercise of his will or for an event which occurs by accident 

"Unless the intention to cause a particular result is declared to be an element of the 
oienee constituted in whole or in part by an act or omission, the result intended to be 
caused by an act or omission is immaterial. 

" Unless otherwise expressly declared, the motive by which a person is induced to do 
or omit to do an act or to form an intention is immaterial so far as regar Js criminal 
lesponsibUity." 

A.C.P. 8 . 



£4 Indictment 

L. J. (M. C.) 183 : B. v. Twose, 14 Cox, 327 ; bat it is impossible now to 
apply the maxim as to "men* rea" generally to all statutes, and it is 
necessary to look at the object and terms of each act to see whether and 
how far knowledge or a particular intent is of the essence of the offence 
created ; Cundy v. Lecocq, 13 Q. B. D. 207, Stephen, J. ; 63 L. J. (M. C.) 
125 ; Hardcastle an Statutes (3rd ed.) 459 ; Maxwell on Statutes (3rd ed.) 
136. It Las been held that it is not necessary to prove that a defendant 
charged with assaulting a constable in the execution of his duty knew that 
the constable was so acting ; B. v. Forbes, 10 Cox, 362, Gurney, Recorder. 
Where the dofendant was indicted under 24 & 25 Vict. & 100, s. 55, for 
unlawfully taking an unmarried girl under the age of sixteen years, out 
of the possession and against the will of her father, it was held to be no 
defence that the defendant believed on good grounds that the girl was above 
sixteen years of age. B. v. Prince, L. B. 2 C. C. B. 154 ; 44 L. J. ( Jf. C.) 122. 
All tho judges in that case agreed on the general principle that an honest 
and reasonable mistake of facts furnishes a good defence for an act com- 
mitted under such mistake, and which would otherwise be criminal, but 
they all, except Lord Esher, considered that the object of the legislature 
being to prevent a scandalous and wicked invasion of parental rights, it 
was to be supposed that they intended that the wrongdoer should act at 
his peril. B. v. Tohon, 23 Q. B. D. 168 at p. 190, per Stephen, J. The 
majority of the jadges seem to have held that in order to make the defence 
of mistake of fact available in that case (If. v. Prince), the accused must 
have proved the existence in his mind of an honest and reasonable belief 
in the existence of circumstances which, if they had really existed, would 
have made his act not only not criminal but also not immoral. R. v. 
Tohon, 23 Q. B. D. 168, at p. 181, per Cave, J. A defendant was convicted 
under the repealed statute 8 & 9 Vict, c 100, s . 44 (a similar provision to 
which is contained in 53 <fc 54 Vict. c. 5, «. 315), of receiving two or more 
lunatics into her house, not being a registered asylum or hospital, or a 
house duly licensed under the above act, or under any previous act, but 
it was specially found by the jury who convicted, that though the persons 
so received were lunatics, the defendant honestly, and on reasonable 
grounds, believed that they were not lunatic It was held that having 
regard to the scope of the act, and the object for which it was apparently 
passed, such mistaken belief was immaterial, and that the conviction was 
right B. v. Bishop, 5 Q. B. D. 259 ; 49 L. J. (M. (?.) 45. But where the 
prisoner was convicted under 24 cfr 25 Vict. c. 100, s. 57, of bigamy, having 
gone through the ceremony of marriage within seven years after she had 
been deserted by her husband, and the jury found that at the time of the 
second marriage she, in good faith and on reasonable grounds, believed 
her husband to be dead, it was held on a case reserved by the court for the 
consideration of all the judges, that a bond fide belief by the prisoner on 
reasonable grounds in tho death of the husband at the time of the second 
marriage, was a good defence, and that the conviction was wrong. B. v. 
Tohon, 23 Q. B. D. 168 ; 58 L. J. (M. C.) 97. The rationale of this 
decision, and the distinction between this case and that of R. v. Prince, ub* 
supra, seems to be contained in the following words of the judgment of 
Stephen, J., 23 Q. B. D. at p. 191 — " The conduct of the woman convicted 
was not in the smallest degree immoral, it was perfectly natural and legiti- 
mate. Assuming the facts to be as she supposed, the infliction of more 
than a nominal punishment on her would have been a scandal. Why, 
then, should the legislature be held to have wished to subject her to 
punishment at all?" It is not, perhaps, easy to draw a distinction 
between R. v. Tohon and B. v. Bishop, ubi supra, but the same learned 
judge, at the page last cited, explained the decision in B. v. Bishop, as 



Commencement and Venue. 35 

hiring gone on " the scope of the act constituting the offence, and the 
object for which it was apparently passed/' cf Cundy v. Lecocq, uhi supra. 
This question has been the subject of numerous decisions with regard to 
offences triable summarily against the statutes relating to licensing, Bond 
?. ffBBi, 24 Q. B. B. 249 ; Brook* v. Mason [1902] 2 K. B. 743 ; Sherras v. 
di Rntzen [1895] 1 Q. B. 918 ; 64 L. J. (M. C.) 218 : and adulteration of 
fcod, Coppen v. Moore (No. 2) [1898] 2 Q. B. 306; 67 L. J. (Q. B.) 689. 
*rw* v. Focrf, 61 L. J. (Af. C.) 110; 17 Cox, 509 ; 66 J. P. 581 : Parser v. 
JLMer[1899]l Q. B. 20 ; 68 L. «7. («. B.) 7 ; 62 J. P. 792. See also Jones v. 
Ihxies [1902] 20 Cox, 184 : Greenwood v. Backhouse, 20 Cox, 196 : CArtste 
t. Cooper (1900) 2 Q. I?. 522. Knowledge by the defendant that ho is 
offending against the penal provisions of a statute is sufficient to constitute 
mens tea. Bank of N.S. W. v. Piper [1897] A. C. 383 ; 66 L. J. (P. C.) 73. 



Sect. 3. 

thk form of an indictment. 

An indictment consists of three parts: the commencement, the 
statement, and the conclusion. The caption is not part of it. See 
post, seet. 6- 

1. The Commencement 

(a) Presentment. 

The commencement of every indictment iB thus : — " Suffolk to wit ;— 
The furors for our lord the King upon their oath, present that," d'c. 
[so proceeding to state the offence for which the defendant is to be 
prosecuted]. If one of the grand jurors be a Quaker, or other person 
entitled to affirm instead of taking an oath, the indictment ought to 
commence — ** The jurors for our lord the King upon their oath and affirma- 
tion present," <fcc ; 9 C. & P. 78 ; but this is not necessary where, in any 
legal proceedings, other legal pro3eedings are set out by way of recital. 
In such eases it is enough to 6 tat 3 that the jurors named acted as jury- 
men. 6 <fc 7 Vict. c. 85, «. 2. An indictment commencing — " The jurors 
of our lady the Queen, <£c., was held not to be bad in arrest of judgment, 
or on writ of error : as the words " of our lady the Queen," might be 
rejected as surplusage, the jurors intended being those mentioned in 
caption of the indictment. B. v. Turner, 2 M . & Bob. 214; Broome v. Ii. % 
12 Q. B. 834. And now such defects are merely formal, and since 1851 
(14 <fc 15 Vict, c 100, s. 25) objections in respect of them must be taken 
before the petty jury is sworn ; and if they are taken the Court may, if 
it think necessary, order the indictment to be forthwith amended. 

The commencement of a second or subsequent count is in form thus : 
— '* And the jurors aforesaid, upon their cath aforesaid, do further present 
that" &c [so proceeding to state the offence]. As to offences which may 
be joined in one indictment, see post, p. 88. 

(i) Venue, 

Statutes. 

14 & 15 Vid. c. 100 {Criminal Procedure Act, 1851), sect. 23.]— "It shall 
not be necessary to state the venue in the body of any indictment ; but 
toe county city, or other jurisdiction named in the margin thereof shall 



36 Indictment 

be taken to be the venae for all the facts stated in the body of such 
indictment : 

" Provided that, in cases where local description is, or hereafter shall 
be, required (see post, p. 67) such local description shall be given in the 
body of the indictment ; 

" And provided also that where an indictment for an offence committed 
in the county of any city or town corporate shall be preferred at the 
assizes of the adjoining county, such county of the city or town shall be 
deemed the venue, and may either be stated in the margin of the indict- 
ment, with or without the name of the county in which the offender is to 
be tried, or be stated in the body of the indictment by way of venue." 

Sect. 24.]—" No indictment for any offence shall be held insufficient 
... for want of a proper and perfect venue. ..." [This re-enacts and 
extends 7 Geo. 4, c. 64, s. 20, which took away the right to object by motion in 
arrest of judgment, or by writ of error, for the want of a proper or perfect 
venue. See R. v. Albert, 5 Q. B. 37 ; Dav. & M. 89 : R. v. Stowell, 5 Q. B. 
44 ; Dav. & M. 189 : R. v. Gregory, 7 Q. B. 274 : R. v. O'Connor, 4 St. IV., 
N. S. 935 ; 5 Q. B. 16.] 

Venue defined.] — Venue is the common law term for the neighbourhood 
(visne) from which the jurors are to come (venire). It is of importance, 
because at common law only a jury of tho district in which the offence 
was committed can convict of it " The old jurisdiction of counties was 
local ; they were like different kingdoms. There was no jurisdiction ont 
of the county, no process out of it." R. v. Weston, 4 Burr. 2507, 2511, 
Lord Mansfield. Venue or local jurisdiction is quite distinct from national 
or territorial jurisdiction. Companhia de Mozambique v. British South 
Jfrica Co. [1893] App. Cos. 602 : R. v. Ellis [1899] 1 Q. B. 230. C. C. li. ; 
Badische Anilin und Soda Fabrik v. Basle Chemical Works [1898] App. 
Cas. 200, 204. 

Venue, how stated.'] — The venue is indicated at the commencement of an 
indictment in the margin, and is tho only part of the commencement of 
an indictment that requires attention. The general common law rale 
upon the subject is, that tho venue in the margin should be the couuty 
or other jurisdiction in which the offence was committed ; e.g., " Norfolk 
to wit" 2 Hale, 166 ; See 1 Chitty, C. L. 193 ; 1 Stephen, Hist Or. L. 281. 
If the jurisdiction of the court in which the bill of indictment is to bo 
preferred extends only to part of the county, or (as in the case of the 
Central Criminal Court constituted by 4 <fc 5 W.i, c. 36, or of Winter 
Assizes held in a Winter Assize County under 39 <fe 40 Vict. c. 57, and 
40 <t* 41 Vict, c 46, or of Spring Assizes held in a Spring Assize County 
under 42 & 43 Vict. c. 1) includes moro than one county, or an area 
specially constituted by Order in Council under 88 <fc 39 Vict. c. 77, s. 23. 
or is confined within the limits of a borough (as to which, see 45 <fc 46 
Vict c. 50 : R. V. Filler, 7 C. & P. 337, and R. v. Gloucestershire Js., 1A.& E\ 
689), the venue in the margin should be co-extensive with the jurisdiction 
of the court ; e.g., " Central Criminal Court to wit," " Winter Assize 
County No. 3, Cambridge, to wit." " City of Norwich and County of the 
same city to wit." That is to say, it should be descriptive of the limit to 
which the jurisdiction of the court is confined, and the offence must bo 
proved to have been committed within the limit so described. R. v. 
Stanbury, L. & C. 128 ; 31 L. J. (M. C.) 88. 

Jurisdiction : General Rule.]— The courts of common law had apart from 



Venue. 37 

statute no power to try any offence not committed within the body of the 
realm, »c, their national jurisdiction was territorial and not personal. 
Madtodv. Att.-Qen. of N. S. W. [1891] App. Cos. 455; Sirdar Ourdyal 
Singh T. Rajah of Faridkote [1894J App. Cos. 670 ; and apart from the 
obsolete jurisdiction of the constable and marshal, no person can be 
tried under English law for an offence committed on land abroad, except 
under the authority of a statute. See R. v. Lewis, Dears. A B. 182; 
26 L. J. (If. C\) 104; 7 Cox, 277. 

The jurisdiction of the courts of British colonies is limited to offences 
committed within their territories, unless imperial legislation or the pro- 
visions of their Constitution Acts otherwise provide. Macleod v. Att.-Oen. 
for S. a W. [1891] App. Cos. 455 : R. v. Hilaire [1903J 3 N. S. W. State 
Rep. 228. See re Caruchet, 9 Queensland L. J. 122 ; Griffith, C.J. : re 
Bigamy Law of Canada, 27 Canada, 461. 

The American decisions on this subject are collected in Dicey, Conflict 
of Li\cs, p. 231 ; and see Moore on Extra-territorial Crime, 23-33. 

Statutory exceptions.'] — To the general rule there are many statutory 
exceptions. In some statutes jurisdiction is given over offences not 
triable at common law. In others, latitude is given as to the place of 
trial of existing offences. 

Treason abroad.] — In indictments for high treason or misprision com- 
mitted out of the realm, the venue might, before the passing of the Local 
Government Act, 1888, be laid in Middlesex if the trial was to be u where 
the King's Bench shall sit and be kept ; " or by special commission in 
such shire as the King should appoint. 35 Hen. 8, c. 2, s. 1. But now, 
by reason of 51 & 52 Vict, c 41, s. 89, sub-s. 3, and R. S. C, Jan., 1903 
( post, ch. v. sect. 2), the venue in indictments for treason abroad, if the 
trial is in the King's Bench Division and not before a special commis- 
sion, is laid in " the county of the county of London and the county of 
Middlesex." This was the venue laid in R. v. Lynch [1903] 1 K. B. 741 
35 Hen. 8, c 2 applies to treasons committed in the Isle of Man, Guernsey, 
Jersey, Sark, or Alderney, or in foreign possessions which, although parts 
of the dominions of the British Crown, are not parts of the realm of 
England. See 3 Co. Inst. 11, 111 ; 4 Co. Inst. 124 ; and post, tit. " Treason.' 9 

Murder, <fcc.]~~" Where any murder or manslaughter shall be com- 
mitted on land out of the United Kingdom, whether within the King's 
dominions or without, and whether the person killed were a subject of 
his Majesty or not, every offence committed by any subject of his Majesty, 
in respect of any such case, whether the same shall amount to the offence 
of murder or of manslaughter, or of being accessory to murder or man- 
slaughter, may be dealt with, inquired of, tried, determined and punished 
in any county or place in England or Ireland in which such person shall 
be apprehended or be in custody, in the same manner in all respects 
as if such offence had been actually committed in that county or place." 
2i<£25 Viet. e. 100, s. 9. A British subject, therefore, who, in a foreign 
country, within the dominion of a foreign power, murders either a British 
subject or a foreigner is triable in England under the express provisions 
of tto section. See R. Y. Azzopardi, 6 St. Tr. t N. & 21 ; 2 Mood. C. C. 
288- 1 C & K. 203: R. V. Sawyer, R. <fc R. 294. In R. v. Bernard, 
8 St Tr US 887; 1 -#• & **. 240, the question was raised whether, 
mufa- o 7? L eJ 31, *- 7 (rep.), a foreigner resident in England could be 
-wJirtbJl As accessory (t>J means of acts done by him in England) to a 
mari^e^nmitted ty a foreigner on foreigners in the kingdom of France -, 



38 Indictment. 

the prisoner, however; was acquitted. Such a case is now covered by 
24 & 25 Vict. c. 100, s. 4. 

Where any person, being feloniously stricken, poisoned, or otherwise 
hurt upon the sea, or at any place out of England or Ireland, shall die 
in England or Ireland ; or being feloniously stricken, etc., in England or 
Ireland, shall die of the same at sea, or at any place out of England or 
Ireland, the offence (whether in the case of principal or accessory) may 
be dealt with, etc., in the county or place in England or Ireland, in which 
the death, stroke, poisoning, or hurt happened. 24 <fc 25 Vict, c 100, «. 10. 
Where a man in a boat at a short distance from the shore was shot by a 
person on the shore, and died instantly, it was held that the stroke and 
death were both upon the high seas, and therefore triable under 28 Hen. 8, 
e. 15, infra, and not under 2 G. 2, c. 21. B. v. Coombes, 1 Leach, 388 ; 
1 East, P. C\ 367; 1 Hawk. c. 37, *. 17. 

In indictments for burning or destroying the King's ships, magazines, 
etc., out of the realm, the venue may be laid in any county within the 
realm. 12 G. 3, c 24, s. 2. 

For all purposes of and incidental to arrest, trial, and punishment, a 
crimo for which a person is liable to be punished under 46 <fc 47 Vict, c 3 
(Explosive Substances Act, 1883), when committed out of the United King- 
dom, shall be deemed to have been committed in the place in which such 
person is apprehended or is in custody. 46 <fc 47 Vict. c. 3, s. 7, sub-s. 2. 

Oppressions, crimes, and offences committed abroad by colonial 
governors, lieutenant governors, deputy governors,* or commanders in 
chief, shall be inquired of, heard and determined in the King's Bench 
Division in England, or before such commissioners and in such county 
of this realm as shall be assigned by his Majesty's commission. 11 W. 3, 
c 12 (11 <fc 12 W. 3, Buffhead). Picton's case, 30 St. Tr. 225 : B. v. Eyre, 
L. B., 3 Q. B. 487. 

Misdemeanors committed in India may be tried in the King's Bench 
Division in England. 13 G. 3, c 63. And in indictments for offences 
committed by persons employed in any publio service " out of Great 
Britain " the venue may be laid in Middlesex. 42 G. 3, c. 85, s. 1. See 
B. v. Shawe, 5 If. & Set. 403. The counties of London and Middlesex 
are now one for purposes of trial. 51 <fc 52 Vict. c. 41, *. 89 ; B. S. C, 
Jan. 1903 (post, ch. v. sect. 2). 

In informations or indictments against the master of a ship for forcing 
on shore or leaving behind on shore or at sea, in any place in or out of 
his Majesty's dominions, any person belonging to his crew, the offence 
may be prosecuted* in any court having criminal jurisdiction in his 
Majesty's dominions, at home or abroad, where such master or other 
person shall happen to be. 57 <fc 58 Vict. c. 60, *. 187. 

Offences against the Foreign Eidistment Act, 1870, may be tried in any 
place where the offence was wholly or partly committed, or in any place 
within the King's dominions where the accused is : and the offence may 
be averred generally to hare been committed in his Majesty's dominions, 
and the marginal venue may be the county only or place where tho trial 
is held. 33 <fc 34 Vict. c. 90, ss. 16, 17 ; B. v. Jameson [1896] 2 Q. B. 425; 
65 L. J. (M. C.) 218 ; 18 Cox, 892. 

Offences against tho Official Secrets Act, 1889, committed out of the 
United Kingdom maybe tried in the High Court, or the Central Criminal 
Court. 52 & 53 Vict. c. 52, s. 6. 

Offences against the Commissioners of Oaths Act, 1889 (52 tfc 53 Vict, 
e. 10, s. 9), and the Foreign Marriage Act, 1892 (55 & 56 Vict. c. 23, s. 15), 
committed outside the King's dominions may be tried in any county or 
place in England. 



Venue. 39 

Of cures in the Admiralty jurisdiction.] — Apart from statute offences in 
the Admiralty jurisdiction were triable by the admiral according to the 
civil law and not according to the course of the common law, and con- 
troversies occasionally arose as to whether the offence was committed 
within the jurisdiction of the admiral or within the body of the realm. 
In JR. v. Coombes, 1 Leach, 888, it was held that where a shot fired on land 
killed a man on the sea the offence was triable in the Admiralty juris- 
diction. This decision is criticised in Badische Anilin ttnd Soda Fabrik 
v. Bade Chemical Works [1898] App. Gas. 200, 204, Halsbury, L.C. The 
distinctions and difficulties are now to a great extent removed by legis- 
lation. By 28 2£ 8, c. 15, s. 1, it was provided that treasons, felonies, 
robberies, murder, and confederacies thereafter committed in or upon the 
sea, or in any other haven, river, creek, or place whereon the admiral 
had or pretended to have jurisdiction should be inquired of, etc., in such 
8bore8 and places in the realm as should be limited for that purpose by 
the King's commission. This mode of trial was extended to the following 
offences if committed on the high seas :— Acta of hostility by a subject of 
this realm against a subject at sea under colour of a foreign commission ; 
11 & 12 W. 3, c. 7, *. 8; 18 O. 2, c 30, s. 1 ; see R. v. Evans, 2 East, P. C. 
798; forcibly boarding a merchant ship, and throwing over or destroying 
the goods; 8 0. 1, c 24, 0. 1 ; trading with pirates or fitting out a vessel 
for that purpose ; 8 O. 1, c 24, *. 1 ; master or seamen running away 
with the ship, goods, etc., or laying violent hands on or confining the 
master, or making a revolt in the ship, etc. ; 11 & 12 W. 3, c. 7, *. 9 ; see 
R. v. M'Qregor, 1 C. <fc K. 429 ; dealing in slaves upon the high seas, or 
in any place where the admiral has jurisdiction, except as therein men- 
tioned; 5 Q. 4, c. 113; see R. v. Zulueta, 1 C. & K. 215; and to the 
offence of being accessory (before or after the fact, on land, or at sea) to 
piracy. 11 & 12 W. 3, c. 7, s. 10. See 8 G. 1, c. 24, s. 3. The offences 
above mentioned, when a commission was issued for their trial under 
2d H. 8, c 15, were inquired of, tried, and determined before the judge of 
the Admiralty Court, and two of the judges of the common-law courts, 
under a commission of oyer and terminer: and, in the indictment, no 
county was inserted in the margin as venue, but instead of it merely the 
words " Admiralty of England. 19 According to Coke, rivers in this country 
to the furthest point of land next the sea, creeks and arms of the sea 
within the body of a county, and the sea-shore between the high and low 
watermarks when the tide is out, are not within the jurisdiction of the 
Admiralty, or within the meaning of the term " high seas." See Con- 
stables case, 5 Co. Rep. 107 ; Hals de Jure Maris, c. 4, p. 10 ; Admiralty 
case, 12 Co. Iiep. 79. According to Hale the Admiralty Court had con- 
current jurisdiction in cases of murder and maiming, and exclusive juris- 
diction in cases of piracy jure gentium, which is not a common-law 
offence. 2 Hale, 18. Hale's view is now accepted. See R. v. Bruce, B. <fc 
R. 243; 2 Leach. 1093 : B. v. Keyn, 2 Ex. D. 76; 46 L. J. (M. C.) 17; 
13 Cox, 403 ; Mayne, Ind. Or. L. fed. 1896] p. 271. The test whether an 
arm of the sea is within the body of a county is said to be, whether a 
man on one shore can see what is being done on the other. 2 East, 
P. C. 804. This has been held to include the Bristol Channel (B. v. 
Cunningham, Bell, 72 : 24 L. J. (M. C.) 66) ; Milford Haven {B. v. Bruce, 
2 Leach, 1093); and Roundstone Bay, Galway {B. v. Mannion, 2 Cox, 158 
C. C. B. Jr.). As to the offences by foreigners on foreign ships, see 41 & 
42 Viet, c 73 {post, p. 41.) 

The jurisdiction of the Admiralty extends over British ships, not only 
on the high seas, but also in foreign rivers, below the bridges, where the 
tide ebbs and flows, and where great ships go, although the municipal 



40 * Indictment. 

authorities of the foreign country may have concurrent jurisdiction. 
R. v. Anderson, L. R. 1 C. C. R.'IGl ; 38 L. J. (M. V.) 12. As to juris- 
diction when a ship is in dock, see If. S. v. Hamilton, 1 Mason, 152, Story, 
J. If great ships go to the place, proof that the tide ebbs and flows is 
unnecessary. R. v. Allen, 1 Mood. C. C. 494. The jurisdiction extends 
to all persons on board the ship whether British subjects or foreigners. 
R. v. Lopez : R. v. Sattler, Dears. & B. 525 ; 27 L. J. (M. C.) 48 : R. v. 
Lesley, Bell, 220; 29 L. J. (M. C.) 97. And therefore where a foreigner 
was convicted at the Central Criminal Court of manslaughter, committed 
on board a British ship in the river Garonne, in France, about 35 miles 
from the sea, and about 300 yards from the nearest shore, within the flow 
and ebb of the tide, the conviction was upheld. R. v. Anderson, ubi 
supra. So also where a larceny is committed by a person unknown on 
board a British ship lying afloat in the ordinary course of trading, in 
the open river at Rotterdam, moored to the quay, in a place where large 
vessels usually lay, and 16 or 18 miles from the sea, between which and 
the ship there were no bridges, and within the ebb and flow of the tide, 
it was held that the larceny took place within the jurisdiction of the 
Admiralty, and therefore that a person who afterwards, in England, 
received the property so stolen could be tried at the Central Criminal 
Court, as the thief himself, even if he had been a foreigner, not one of 
the crew, might have been so tried. R. v. Carr, 10 Q. B. D. 76 ; 52 L. J. 
(M. C.) 12. The liability of a foreigner is not affected by the fact that 
he was in the first instance brought illegally and by force on board the 
ship, unless the offence was committed merely for the purpose of freeing 
himself from such unlawful restraint. Therefore, where the defendant, 
a foreigner, having committed a crime in Ed gland, had fled to Hamburg, 
and was there arrested and forced on board an English ship, and while 
he was kept in custody on board such ship on the high seas, killed the 
officer who had arrested him, not for the purpose of escaping, but a 
malice prepense, it was held that, even assuming such arrest and deten- 
tion to be illegal, he was guilty of murder. R. v. Sattler (ubi supra). 
Where on a trial for maliciously wounding on the high seas, it was stated 
by threo witnesses that the vessel, on board of which the offence was 
alleged to have been committed, was a British ship of Shields, and 
that she was sailing under the British flag, but no proof was given 
of tho register of the vessel or of tho ownership ; it was held that the 
court had jurisdiction, as the evidence was sufficient to prove that 
the vessel was British, and that being so, the court would have juris- 
diction even if it had appeared that the vessel was not registered. 
R. v. Seberg, L. R. 1 C. C. R. 264 ; 89 L. J. (M. C.) 133 : R. v. Allen, 
10 Cox. 405. 

In R. v. Bjornsen, L. <fc C. 545 ; 34 L. J. (M. C.) 180; 10 Cox, 74, the 
prisoner was one of the crew of a ship built in Hoi stein, whence she sailed 
to London. All the officers and crew were foreigners, R., the registered 
sole owner, was an alien born, but described in the register as M of London, 
merchant." The ship sailed from London under the British flag. While 
on the voyage the prisoner killed the master on board the vessel when 
several thousand miles from England, and 200 miles from land. On the 
trial of the prisoner for murder these facts were proved, and no evidence 
wns given tbat R. had been naturalized or had obtained letters of deni- 
zation ; under these circumstances it was held that there was no evidence 
that the ship was British, and that consequently the prisoner could not 
be convicted in England. Nor can a foreigner be indicted in this country 
for casting away a foreign ship in foreign waters, if the act do not amount 
to piracy ; but he may be indicted here for a conspiracy in this country 



Venue. 41 

to commit such an offence, provided the conspiracy be not limited to doing 
the act abroad. B. v. Kohn, 4F.&F. 68, Willes, J. 

A foreigner who kills another foreigner or an Englishman on the high 
seas on board a foreign ship, is in nowise amenable to the law of England, 
or triable in England except in a case of piracy. B. v. Lewis, Dears. <ft B. 
182; 16 L. J. (M. C.) 104 : B. v. De Mattos, 1 CAP. 458 : B. v. Depardo, I 
Taunt. 26 : B. & B. 134 ; 9 B. B. 693. This rule applies where the ship 
has been illegally seized as a slaver by a British vessel. B. v. Serua, 1 
Den. 104 ; 2 C. & K. 53 ; 1 Cox, 298. The foreigner is liable to extra- 
dition where the ship belongs to a state as to which the Extradition Acts 
have been applied. 33 & 34 Vict, c 52, a. 16. A foreigner was indicted 
at the Central Criminal Court for manslaughter under the following 
circumstances. He was in command of a foreign ship, passing within 
three miles of the shore of England on a voyage to a foreign port ; and 
whilst within that distance his ship ran into a British ship and sank her, 
whereby a passenger on board the latter ship was drowned. The facts of 
the case were such as, apart from the question of jurisdiction, to amount 
to manslaughter by English law. It was held by the majority of a court 
of 13 judges that the offence was not committed on board the British 
ship, and that thero was no jurisdiction in the courts of this country to 
try the prisoner, a foreigner passing the English coast on the high seas 
in a foreign ship, though the occurrence took place within three miles of 
the English coast. B. v. Keyn, 2 Ex. D. 63 ; L. J. (Jf. C.) 17 ; 13 Cox, 
403. Parliament approved the view of the minority, and at once passed 
the Territorial Waters Jurisdiction Act, 1878 (41 & 42 Vict. c. 73). Sect. 2 
of that Act declares (see B. v. Dudley, 14 Q. B. D. 273, 660 ; 54 L. J. (M. C.) 
32) and enacts that " an offence committed by a person, whether he is or 
is not a subject of his Majesty, on the open sea, within the territorial 
waters of his Majesty's dominions, is an offenco within the jurisdiction of 
the Admiral, although it may have been committed on board or by means 
of a foreign ship, and the person who committed such offence may be 
arrested, tried, and punished accordingly." The phrases and words " the 
territorial waters of his Majesty's dominions/ 1 " the jurisdiction of the 
Admiral," "offence," "ship," and " foreign ship," are defined by s. 7 of the 
same statute. And ss. 3 <fc 4 place certain restrictions on the prosecution 
of a person not a subject of his Majesty, and contain provisions as to pro- 
cedure. The statute does not expressly exclude or include foreign public 
vessels. As to their position, see The Parlement Beige , 5 P. D. 197 ( V. A .) and 
Beport of Fugitive Slave Commission, 1876, Pari. Pap. 1878, vol. 28. The 
extent to which municipal jurisdiction outside the three miles limit is inter- 
nationally recognized was fully discussed in the Behring Sea Arbitration. 

The Central Criminal Court has jurisdiction to inquire of, hear, and 
determine any offence committed, or alleged to have been committed, 
within the jurisdiction of the Admiralty of Eogland, and to deliver the 
appointed gaols of the Central Criminal Court of prisoners committed to 
or detained there for such offences ; and all indictments found and pro- 
ceedings had before the Court are valid. 4 & 5 W. 4, c. 36, *. 22 ; 44 <fc 
45 Vict. c. 64. s. 2 (2) : B. v. Anderson, L. B. 1 C. C. B. 161 : B. v. Carr, 
10 Q. B. D. 76 ; 52 L. J. (M. C.) 12. 

By the Admiralty Offences Act, 1844 (7 & 8 Vict. c. 2), all offences 
alleged to have been committed on the high seas, and other places within 
the Admiralty of England, may be heard and determined by his Majesty's 
justices of the assize or others his Majesty's commissioners by whom any 
court shall be holden under any of his Majesty's commissions of oyer 
and terminer or general gaol delivery, and they shall have severally and 
jointly all the powers which by any act are given to the commissioners 



42 Indictment, 

named in any commission of oyer and terminer fur the trying of offences 
committed within the Admiralty of England, and may deliver the gaol, 
in every county and franchise within the limits of their several com- 
missions, of any person committed to or imprisoned therein for any offence 
alleged to have been committed upon the high seas, etc., and all indict- 
ments found, and other proceedings had, by and before the 6aid justices 
and commissioners shall be valid (*. 1). By sect. 2 of the same Act in all 
indictments preferred before the said justices and commissioners under 
that Act, the venue laid in the margin shall be the same as if the offence 
had been committed in the county where the trial is had ; and all material 
facts, which, in other indictments, would be averred to have taken place 
in the county where the trial is had, shall, in indictments preferred under 
that Act, be averred to have taken place " on the high seas." The offence 
need not, therefore, now be averred to have been committed within the 
jurisdiction of tho Admiralty. It. v. Jones, 1 Den. 101 ; 2 C. <fe K. 165. 
Sect. 3 provides for the commitment for trial of persons charged with 
such offences ; and sect. 4 saves the jurisdiction of tho Central Criminal 
Court, under 4 & 5 W. 4, c 36, s. 22, ante, p. 41. Where any person shall 
within the jurisdiction of the Admiralty of England or Ireland, become 
accessory to any felony, whether at common law or by statute, and 
whether committed within that jurisdiction or elsewhere, or begun within 
it and completed elsewhere, or begun elsewhere and completed within it, 
his offence shall be felony, and the venue in the margin of the indictment 
shall be the same as if the offence had been committed in the county or 
place in which he is indicted, and his offence shall be averred to havo 
been committed " on the high seas." 24 & 25 Vict. c. 94, «. 9. As to tho 
trial of offenders in the British dominions beyond the seas for crimes 
committed on the high seas, or in places in which the Crown has power 
or jurisdiction out of his Majesty's dominions, see 12 & 13 Vict. c. 96; and 
63 & 54 Vict. c. 37. By the Merchant Shipping Act, 1894 (57 & 58 Vict. c. 
60), 8. 687, all offences against property or person committed in or at any 
place either ashore or afloat out of his Majesty's dominions by any master, 
seaman, or apprentice, who at the time when the offence is committed is, 
or within three months previously has been, employed in any British ship, 
shall be deemed to be offences of the same nature respectively, and be 
liable to the same punishments respectively, and be inquired of, heard, 
tried, determined, and adjudged in the same manner, and by the same 
courts, and in the same places as if such offences had been committed 
within the jurisdiction of the Admiralty of England ; and the costs and 
expenses of the prosecution of any such offences may be directed to be 
paid as in the case of costs and expenses of prosecutions for offences com- 
mitted within the jurisdiction of the Admiralty of England. R. v. Dudley* 
14 <?. B. D. 273 ; 54 L. J. {M. C.) 32, decided on the similar provision in 
s. 267 of 17 & 18 Vict. c. 104 (rep.). See liberty Government of India, 410, and 
as to colonial jurisdiction under the Act, R. v. Hinde (1902) 22 N. Z. L. i?„ 
436. A hulk retaining the general appointments of a ship, registered as a 
British ship, and hoisting the British ensign, although only used as a 
floating warehouse, is a British ship within the meaning of the above 
enactment. R. v. Armstrong, 13 Cox, 184, Archibald, J. 67 <fe 58 Vict, c 
60, s. 686, subs. 1, also enacts, that where any person, being a British 
subject, charged with having committed any crime or offence on board, 
any British ship on the high seas, or in any foreign port or harbour, or 
on board any foreign ship to which he does not belong, or not being a 
British subject is charged with having committed any crime or offence on 
board any British ship on the high seas, and that person is found (that is 
to say, is found to be at the time of bis trial, R. v. Lopez : R. v. Sattler, Dears* 






Vtnut. 43 

<fr B. 525; 27 L. J. (M. C.) 48; 7 Cox, 431) within the jurisdiction of any 
court of justice in his Majesty's dominions, which would have had cog- 
nizance of such crime or offence if committed within the limits of its 
ordinary jurisdiction, such court shall have jurisdiction to hear and try 
the case as if such crime or offence, had been so committed ; sub-s. 2 saves 
the effect of 12 & 13 Vict. c. 96. Each of the Criminal Law Consolidation 
Ads of 1861 contains a provision by which all indictable offences in those 
acts respectively mentioned committed within the jurisdiction of the 
Admiralty, are to be deemed to be offences of the same nature and subject 
to the same punishments as if they had been committed on the land in 
England or Ireland, and may be dealt with, inquired of, tried, and deter- 
mined in any county or place in England or Ireland in which the offender 
shall be apprehended or be in custody, in the same manner in all respects 
as if the offence had been committed in that county or place. 24 (fc 25 
Vict. c. 96 [Larceny, etc.], s. 115; c. 97 [Malicious Injuries to Property], 
«. 72; r. 9b [Forgery], s."50; c.99 [Offences relating to the Coin], s. 36 ; c. 
100 [Offences against the Person, 8. 68]. These enactments give jurisdic- 
tion to a borough quarter sessions to try a man arrested in tho borough 
for offences committed at sea. B. v. Peel, L. & C. 231 ; L. J. (M. C.) 69 ; 
9 Cox, 220. 

Offences during journeys.] — In indictments for felonies or misdemeanors 
committed upon any person, or on or in respect of any property, in or 
upon any coach, cart, or other carriage whatsoever employed in any 
journey, or on board any vessel whatsoever employed in any voyage or 
journey upon any navigable river, canal, or inland navigation, the venuo 
may be laid in any county through which the coach, etc., or vessel shall 
have passed in the course of the journey or voyage during which tho 
felony or misdemeanor was committed, in the same manner as if it had 
been actually committed therein; and where the side, bank, centre or 
other part of the highway, river, etc., shall constitute the boundary of 
two counties, the venuo may be laid in either of the counties through, 
or adjoining to, or by, the boundary of any part whereof the coach, etc., 
or vessel shall have passed in the course of the journey or voyage. 7 G. 
4, c 64, «. 13. This enactment is not confined to tho carriages of common 
carriers, or to public conveyances, but extends to any carriage employed 
in any journey. B. v. Sharpe, Dears. 415; 24 L. J. (A/. C.) 40; 6 Cox, 
418. The fact that a person assaulted in a train changes into another 
carriage of the same train during the journey, does not take away the 
jurisdiction. B. v. French, 8 Cox, 252. Similar provisions are contained 
in a. 21 of the Fugitive Offenders Act, 1881 (44 & 45 Vict. c. 69), as to 
offences on journeys or voyages in which the vehicle or vessel passes 
through one or more British possessions* 

Offences in more than one county or placed — Where a felony or mis- 
demeanor is committed on the boundary of two or more counties, or 
within the distance of 500 yards of the boundary, or is begun in one 
county and completed in another, the venue may be laid in either county, 
in the same manner as if it had been wholly committed therein. 7 G. 4, 
c 64, s. 12 (cf. 41 & 45 Vict. c. 69, s. 20). The distance is measured in a 
direct line as the crow flies, B. v. Wood, 5 Jur. 225; cf. Lake v. Butler, 
5 E.& B. 92, and 52 & 53 Vict. c. 63, «. 34, which governs statutes passed 
since 18S9. The first branch of this enactment extends to the boundaries 
of counties only, and not to prosecutions in limited jurisdictions. JR. v. 
Welsh, 1 Mood. C. C. 175. 7 G. 4, c 64, s. 12 regulates venue only, and 
does not enable the prosecutor to lay the offence in one county and try it 



44 Indictment 

in the other ; but only to lay and try it in cither. R. v. Mitchell, 2 Q. B. 
636; 2 G. & D. 274. It seems that in cases of murder or manslaughter, 
where the cause of death arises in one county, and the death takes place 
in another, the prisoner may, under this statute, be indicted in either 
county. 3 Ross. Cr. (6th ed.), 146. 

In the case of misdemeanor persons who anywhere incite, procure, and 
abet, or assist its commission, can be indicted in the county in which the 
misdemeanor is committed, R. y. Johnson, 7 East, 65 ; 29 St. Tr. 81 ; 8 
R. R. 597. Where an offence is done through on innocent agent {see ante, 
p. 12), the principal may bo indicted in the county in which the agent 
acted, or in that in which the principal procured him to act Fost. 319 : 
R. v. Brisac, 4 East, 164. In indictments for conspiracies or other mis- 
demeanors, the venue may be laid in any county in which it can be 
proved that an act was done by any one of the offenders in furtherance of 
their common design. R. v. Burdett, 4 B. & Aid. 95 ; 1 St. Tr., N. S. 1, 
116. See R. v Brisac, 4 East, 161. So in indictments for compassing the 
King's death, or for any of the treasons in 36 G. 3, c 7, *. 1 (made 
perpetual by 57 0.3, c. 6, s. 1), the venue may be laid in any county in 
which a sufficient overt act can be proved. R. v. Lord Preston, 12 St. Tr. 
615 : R. v. Vane, Eel. (J.) 14, 15 ; 6 St, Tr. 119. See Deacon's case Fost. 9 : 
18 St. Tr. 365 ; and post, tit. " Treason." In an indictment for sending a 
threatening letter, the venue may be laid either in the county where the 
prosecutor received it; R. v. Girdwood, 2 East, P. C. 1120; 1 Leach, 142: 
R. v. Esser, 2 East, P. C. 1125; or in the county from which the offender 
sent it. So, if a libel, R. v. Burdett, 1 St. Tr., N. S. 1, 124; 4 B. <fe Aid. 
95 : R. v. Ellis [1899] 1 Q. B. 230 : R. v. Watson, 1 Camp. 215 : or a letter 
containing a challenge {R. v. Williams, 2 Camp. 506) be sent from the 
county of A. to the county of B., the venue may Le laid m either county. 
So, if an act done in one county prove a nuisance to another, in an indict- 
ment for it, the venue may be laid in either county, although it has been 
said to be more correct to lay it in the county in which the act was 
done. Staundf. b. 2, 91. See post, tit. Larceny. These rules appear 
not to apply to offences part of the essential elements of which take 
place outside England. R. v. Ellis [1899J 1 Q. B. 230, C. C. R. Of. 
Badische Anilin und Soda Fabrik v. Basle Chemical Works [1898J App. 
Cas. 200, 204. 

Offences in counties of cities or towns.] — Where an offence is committed 
within the county of a city or town corporate (except in London, West- 
minster, or the borough of Southwark, 38 G. 3, c. 52, s. 10), the prosecutor 
may prefer his indictment to the grand jury of the next adjoining 
county, at the sessions of oyer and terminer or gaol delivery, and may 
have the offender tried there. 38 G. 3, c. 52, s. 2. See R. v. Gough, 2 
Doug. 791 : R. v. Mellor, R. & R. 144 : R. Y. Goff, R. & R. 179 : R. v. 
Pinney, 3 St. Tr., N. S. 11. Or, if the bill have been found by a grand 
jury of the county of the city, etc., any court of oyer and terminer or gaol 
delivery, holden for such county of the city, etc., may order it to be tried 
by a jury of the next adjoining county. 38 G. 3, c. 52, s. 3. In such cases 
the venue should be stated as prescribed by 14 <fc 15 Vict. c. 100, s. 23 
{supra, p. 35), and the court before which the offender is tried and con- 
victed may order the judgment to be executed either in the county of 
trial or in the county of the city or town corporate in which the offence 
was committed. 51 G. 3, c. 100, *. 1. By the Criminal Justice Adminis- 
tration Act, 1851 (14 & 15 Vict, c 55, *. 19), " whenever any justice or 
justices of the peace, or coroner, acting for any county of a city or county 
of a town corporate, within which her Majesty has not been pleased for 



Venue. 45 

Ave years next before the passing of this act (1 Aug., 1851) to direct a 
commission of oyer and terminer aud gaol delivery to be executed, and 
until her Majesty shall be pleased to direct a commission of oyer and 
terminer and gaol delivery to be executed within the same, shall commit 
for safe custody to the gaol or house of correction of such county of a city 
or town any person charged with any offence committed within the limits 
of such county of a city or town not triable at the court of quarter 
sessions of the said county of a city or county of a town, the commitment 
shall specify that such person is committed pursuant to this Act ; and the 
recognizances to appear to prosecute and give evidence taken by such 
justice, justices or coroner, shall in all such cases be conditioned for 
appearance, prosecution, and giving evidence at the court of oyer and 
terminer and gaol delivery for the next adjoining county . . . and the 
justice, justices, or coroner, by whom persons charged as aforesaid may 
be committed, shall deliver or cause to be delivered to the proper officer 
of the court the several examinations, informations, evidence, recog- 
nizances, and inquisitions relative to such persons at the time and in the 
manner that would be required in case such persons had been committed 
to the gaol of such adjoining county by a justice or justices, or coroner, 
having authority so to commit; and the same proceedings shall and may 
be had thereupon at the sessions of oyer and terminer or general gaol 
delivery for such adjoining county, as in the case of persons charged with 
offences of the like nature committed within such county." 

5. 23 of the same Act extends to prisoners bred in or removed for trial 
to the adjoining county (under s. 19) the provisions of 38 G. 3, c. 52, and 
51 O. 3, c 100, as to the execution of the sentences to be passed on such 
persons, and as to the payment of expenses (see post. Book 1. ch. vl., Costs). 
By s. 188 of the Municipal Corporations Act, 1882 (45 <fc 46 Vict. c. 50), 
(1) "Until her Majesty is pleased to direct a commission of oyer and 
terminer and gaol delivery to be executed within any borough, being a 
county of a city or county of a town, all bills of indictment for offences 
committed within that borough shall be preferred, and all proceedings 
thereon shall be had in the manner authorized by 38 G. 3, c 52. (2) For 
the purposes of that Act, each borough named in the 6th schedule shall 
he considered as next adjoining the county named in conjunction there- 
with." 45 & 46 Vict. c. 50, *. 242, amends 14 & 15 Vict. c. 55, s. 24, by 
substituting for the purposes of the Act of 1851 the same 6th schedule. 
Under it, Northumberland is considered the next adjoining county to 
Berwick-upon-Tweed and Newcastle-upon-Tyne; Gloucestershire, to 
Bristol ; Cheshire, to Chester ; Devonshire, to Exeter ; and Yorkshire, 
to Eingston-upon-HuH. Bristol, Chester, and Exeter were excepted from 
38 G. 3, c. 52 (see s. 10), but the exception was repealed by the Municipal 
Corporation* Act, 1835 (5 & 6 W. 4, c. 76, s. 109). See B. v. Ifolden, 
8 C. & P. 606. As to the mode of stating that the county of trial is next 
adjoining, tee B. v. Goff, B. & B. 179. 

Separate commissions of assize, etc., are still issued and executed for 
the counties of the cities or towns of Newcastle-upon-Tyne, Exeter, Bristol, 
Norwich, Gloucester, Lincoln, Nottingham, Worcester, York, Haverford- 
west, and Carmarthen, and for the borough of Leicester. 

The counties of cities or towns besides those already named are Canter- 
bury, Southampton, Lichfield, and Poole. 

Offences tried in the High Court.]— Where an indictment is tried in 
the High Court, the venue is the county in which the indictment was 
found, unless change of venue is ordered (see post, s. 13, Certiorari), or 
unless the trial is at bar. B. v. Amery, 1 T. B. 863; 1 B. B. 179: 



46 Indictment. 

Att.-Gen. v. Churchill, 8 M . & W. 171, 193: Dixon v. Farrer, 18 Q. B. D. 
43 (0. ^.). 

Offences in Central Criminal Court District.]— In indictments preferred 
at the Central Criminal Court (the jurisdiction of which extends to the 
city of London and counties of London and of Middlesex, and certain 
specified portions of the counties of Essex, Kent, and Surrey ; 4*5 W. 4, 
c 86, *. 2 ; 38 & 89 Vict. c. 77. s. 23; 51 & 52 Vict. c. 41, s. 89), the district 
within the limits of its jurisdiction is to be deemed and taken to be one 
county for all purposes of venue, local description, trial, judgment, and 
execution not " thereinbefore " specially provided for; and the venue laid 
in the margin shall be as follows, "Central Criminal Court, to wit;" and 
all offences which in other indictments would be laid to have been com- 
mitted in the county where the trial is had, and all material facts which, 
would be in other indictments averred to have taken place in the county 
where the trial is had, shall, in indictments preferred and tried in the* 
said court, be laid to have been committed and averred to have taken 
place " within the jurisdiction of the said court." 4 <fc 5 W. 4, c 36, s. 3. 
As to the trial at this court of offences committed out of its jurisdiction, 
under 19 ct 20 Vict. c. 16, see post, s. 13, Certiorari. Persons subject to the 
military law, who have been committed for the murder or manslaughter 
of any person subject to that Act, may, under certain circumstances, 
where the offence has been committed in England or Wales, out of the 
jurisdiction of the Central Criminal Court, be indicted and tried before 
that court. 25 & 26 Vict. c. 65. The history of the jurisdiction of the 
court is given in 6 St. Tr. } N. 8. 1135, Appendix C. 

Accessories.] — Accessories before or after the fact to any felony wholly 
committed within England or Ireland may be dealt with, inquired of, 
tried, determined, and punished by any court which shall have jurisdic- 
tion to try the principal felony, or any felonies, committed in any county 
or place in which the act by reason whereof such person shall have 
become such accessory shall have been committed : "and in every other 
case accessories before the fact may be dealt with, etc., by any court 
having jurisdiction to try the principal felony or any felonies committed 
in any county or place in which the accessory shall be apprehended or 
be in custody, whether the principal felony shall have been committed 
on the sea or on the land, or begun on the sea and completed on the land, 
or begun on the land and completed on the sea, and whether within his 
Majesty's dominions or without, or partly within his Majesty's dominions 
and partly without." 24 & 25 Vict. c. 94, s. 7. See B. v. Wallace, 2 Mood. 
C. C. 200; C. & Mar. 200. An accessory before the fact may however be 
indicted, etc., in all resets as if he were the principal felon. 24 <fc 25 Vict. 
c. 94, s. 1. As to accessories whero the offence is committed in the Ad- 
miralty jurisdiction, see ante, p. 42. 

Bigamy.'] — In indictments for bigamy, the venue may be laid either in 
the county where the offender was apprehended, or is in custody, 24 & 25 
Vict. c. 100, 8. 57, or in the county in which the second marriage took 
place. Where the indictment is not preferred in the county where the 
second marriage was, but in the county where the prisoner was appre- 
hended or is in custody, it need not state that the prisoner was appre- 
hended or is in custody in the county in which the indictment is preferred. 
B. v. Whiley, 1 C. & K. 150 (wrongly reported in 2 Mood. C. C. 186). If 
the defendant, being in custody for a felony, be detained for bigamy, he 



Venue. 47 

may be indicted for the bigamy in the county in which he is so detained. 
B. v. Gordon, B. & B. 48. 

Coinage offences!] — In indictments for offences with reference to false or 
counterfeit coin, " where any person shall tender, utter, or put off any 
counterfeit coin in any county or jurisdiction, and shall also tender, utter, 
or put off any other counterfeit coin in any other county or jurisdiction 
on the same day or within ten days next ensuing, or where two or more 
persona have acted in concert in different counties or jurisdictions to 
commit any offence against the Coinage Offences Act, 1861, the offence 
may be laid and charged to have been committed, and the offender may 
be dealt with, etc., in any one of those counties or jurisdictions." 24 <& 25 
Vict, c 99, s. 23. 

Customs, excise, and stamps.] — In indictments for violently assaulting 
or resisting officers of the excise (7 & 8 0. 4, c. 53, s. 43;, or for offences 
against the Customs Acts (39 & 40 Vict, c 36, s. 258), the venue may be 
laid in any county. In indictments for offences against the customs com- 
mitted upon the water which is not or is not certainly known to be within 
an/county, the venue may be laid in any place on land where the offender 
may be or be brought. 39 <fc 40 Vict. c. 86, s. 229. 

The provisions of 53 G. 3, c 108, s. 35, as to venue in offences relating 
to stamp duties, were repealed, etc., in 1870 (33 & 34 Vict. c. 99), and not 
re-enacted. The Stamp Duties Management Act, 1891 (54 & 55 Vict. c. 38), 
contains no venue clause ; but 24 & 25 Vict. c. 98, s. 91, infra, is sufficient 
to cover cases of forgery of stamps. 

Escapes and prison breach.'] — In indictments for escapes, breaches of 
prison, and rescues, the venuo might formerly be laid either in the juris- 
diction where the offence was committed, or in that where the offender 
should be apprehended and retaken. 4 G. 4, c 64, a. 44. That statute 
was wholly repealed by 28 <fc 29 Vict. c. 126, s. 73, sched. 3. But provisions 
similar to a. 44 are in force as to escapes from Parkhurst Prison (1 
& 2 Vict. c. 82, 8 18), and as to escapes from Pentonville (5 <fe 6 Vict. 
c 29, s. 28). 

In indictments for being at large before the expiration of a sentence of 
penal servitude, the venue may be laid either in the county where the 
defendant was apprehended or in that from whence he was ordered to be 
sent to penal servitude. 5 G. 4, c 84, <. 22 ; 20 cC 21 Vict, c 3, s. 3. 

' Extortion.]— In indictments for extortion, the venue, it is said, may be 
laid in any county. 31 Eliz. c. 5, s. 4 ; 1 Hawk. c. 68, s. 6 n. (3) ; 2 Stark. 
(Jr. PL (2nd ed.) 611, n. (k). Bed queers ; 2 Hawk. c. 26, s. 50 ; 2 Chitt. 
C. L. 294 (n). It is, however, doubtful whether 31 Eliz. c. 5, s. 4, ever 
applied to criminal proceedings : and this doubt is strengthened by the 
fact of its total repeal by the Civil Procedure Acts Bepeal Act, 1879 (42 
& 43 Vict, c 59). The only safe course now is to lay the venue for 
extortion in the jurisdiction where the offence was committed. 

Forgery and per jury. •]— In indictments for forgery, and uttering forged 
matter, whether the offence be indictable at common law, or by virtue of 
any Act passed, or to be passed, the venue may be laid and the offender 
may be dealt with, etc., in any county or place in which he shall be 
apprehended or is in custody, in the same manner in all respects as if his 
offence had been actually committed in that county or place. 24 & 25 
Vict. e. 93, s. 41. See B. v. James, 7 C. & P. 553 : B. v. Smythies, 1 Den. 



48 Indictment 

498 ; 19 L. J. (A/. C.) 31, both decided under a similar Act, 11 0. 4 & 1 W. 
4, c 66, s. 24 (rep.)* And accessories before and after the fact, if the offence 
be felony, and aiders and abettors, if the offence be a misdemeanor, may 
be dealt with, etc., in any county or place in which they shall be appre- 
hended or are in custody, in the same manner in all respects as if their 
offence, and the offence of their principal, had been actually committed in 
such county or place. 24 & 25 Vict, c. 98, s. 41. Forgeries and perjuries 
punishable under the Commissioners for Oaths Act, 1889 "(whether com- 
mitted within or without his Majesty's dominions), may be inquired of, 
dealt with, tried and punished in any county or place in the United 
Kingdom in which the person charged was apprehended or is in custody, 
and for all purposes incidental to or consequential on the trial or punish- 
ment the offence shall be deemed to have been committed in that county 
or jplace." 52 <fc 53 Vict. c. 10, s. 9. 

Offences punishable as perjury under the Foreign Marriage Act, 1892, 
are triable in any county in England, and dealt with in the same manner 
in all respects as if committed in the county of trial. 55 & 56 Vict. c. 23, 
8. 15. 

Perjury at a naval court martial wherever committed is triable in 
England. 29 <fc 30 Vict. c. 109, s. 67. 

Larceny and receiving.] — If a man commit larceny, simple or compound, 
in one county, and carry the goods with him into another, he may be 
indicted for the simple or compound larceny in the county in which he 
committed it, or he may bo indicted for it as for a pimple larceny in the 
county into which, or in any of the counties through which, he carried 
the goods ; for, in contemplation of law, there is such a taking and 
carrying away as constitute the offence of larceny at common law in every 

Elace through which, at any distance of time, the goods were carried by 
im. P.y. Parkin,! Mood. C. G. 45; 1 #afc,507; 2 Hale, 163; 3 Co. Inst. 
113 ; 1 Hawk, c 83, «. 52 ; 4 PI. Com. 301 ; 2 East, P. C. 771 : Griffith v. 
Taylor, 2 C. P. D. 194, 202, Cockburn, L.C. J. : P. v. Fenley, 20 Cox, 252, 
Jeff, J. The larceny itself is ambulatory, but the aggravated circum- 
stances are fixed and stationary. 1 Hah, 536 .- P. v. Thomson, 2 Puss. Cr. 
(6th ed.) 233 : P. v. Millar, 1 C. & P. 665 : P. v. Fenley, ubi svpra. A 
country bank note was stolen during its transit through the post office 
from Swindon, in Wiltshire, to Bristol, and the same note was afterwards 
inclosed by the defendant in a letter posted by him in Somersetshire, and 
addressed to the bankers at Swindon, requesting payment of it, which 
letter with its contents arrived in due course at Swindon ; the defendant 
was held triable in Wiltshire, the possession of the post office servants or 
of the bankers in Wiltshire being held for this purpose to be his posses- 
sion. P. v. Cryer, Dears. & B. 324 ; 26 L. J. (M. C.) 192. Where a chattel 
was stolen in Liverpool, and was sent thence by the thief by rail, and 
delivered by the railway company to the receiver in the county of M. for 
the purpose of being disposed of by the receiver, and there was no 
evidence of any possession by the thief in the county of M., unless either 
the possession of the railway company or of the receiver could be deemed 
his possession, it was held that the thief retained control over the chattel 
in M., was therefore in possession thereof in M.,and was liable to be tried 
in M. under 24 & 25 Vict. c. 96, s. 114 : P. v. Pogers, L. P. 1 C. C. P. 136 ; 
37 L. J. (M. C.) 83. But if the nature of the property be changed, an 
indictment for stealing the article in its original state cannot be preferred 
in the county into which, when so changed, the property is carried. 
P. v. Edwards, P. & P. 497 : P. v. Ealloway, 1 G. & P. 127. Nor, where 
several commit a joint felony, in the county of A., and there divide the 



Venue. 49 

goods, and afterwards separately carry each his respective share into the 
county of B., can they be indicted for a joint felony in the latter county. 
R. v. Barnett, 2 Rubs. Cr. (6th ed.) 284. Bat if two persons steal a thing 
in one county, though one of them alone carry the property into another 
county, yet, if both afterwards co-operate to secure the thing in the latter 
county, both may be indicted in the latter county ; for the subsequent 
concurrence may be connected with the previous taking. B. v. County, 
% Bust. Cr. (6th ed.) 193, 285 : B. v. WDonagh, Carr. Supp. 23. The 
taking into the second county, however, must be animo furandi ; the 
mere possession there is not sufficient A constable took the defendant 
with two stolen horses in Surrey, and afterwards, at his request, rode with 
him on the horses into Kent, where he escaped ; the defendant was after- 
wards indicted in Kent, and the judges were unanimously of opinion that 
there was no evidence of stealing in Kent B. v. Simmonds, 1 Mood. C. C. 
408. Where an indictment for compound larceny is found in a juris- 
diction other than that in which the larceny took place there is no 
power to try it : and it is doubtful whether the court can acquire juris- 
diction by striking ont the circumstances of aggravation. B. v. Fenley, 
23 Cox, 252, Jdf, J. In an indictment for embezzlement where the money 
is received in one county and the receipt denied in another, it has been 
held that the venue may be laid in either county. B. v. Taylor, B. & B. 
63; SB.JbP.596: B.v. Hobton, B.& J?. 56: i*. v. Bogers, 3 Q. B.D.2S; 
47 L.J.(M. 6*.) 11. A person who steals goods on a British ship within 
the jurisdiction of the Admiralty of England or Ireland may be indicted 
in any county or place in England or Ireland in which he is apprehended 
or in custody : 24 A 25 Vict, c 96, «. 115. It was otherwise at common 
law. 3 Co. Inst. 113 ; 1 Hawk. c. 33, s. 52. 

If a person, having stolen or otherwise feloniously taken any chattel, 

money, or valuable security, or other property whatsoever, in any one 

part of the United Kingdom, afterwards have the same in his possession 

in an j other part of the United Kingdom, he may be dealt with, etc., in 

that part of the United Kingdom in which he so had the property, in the 

Fame manner as if he had actually stolen it there. 24 & 25 Vict, c 96, s. 

111. " And, if any person, in any one part of the United Kingdom, shall 

receive, or have any chattol, money, valuable security, or other property 

whatsoever, which shall havo been stolen or otherwise feloniously taken 

in any other part of the United Kingdom, knowing such property to have 

been stolen or otherwise feloniously taken, he may be dealt with, indicted, 

tried, and punished for such offence in that part of the United Kingdom 

where he shall so receive or have such property, in the same manner as if 

it had been originally stolen or taken in that part." 24 <fc 25 Vict, c 96, 

*. 114, 122. 

''Whosoever shall receive any chattel, money, valuable security, or 

other property whatsoever knowing the same to have been feloniously or 

unlawfully stolen, taken, obtained, converted, or disposed of, may, 

whether charged as an accessory after the fact to the felony, or with a 

substantive felony, or with a misdemeanor only, may be dealt with, 

indicted, tried, and punished in the county or place in which he shall have 

or shall have had any such property in his possession, or in any county or 

place in which the party guilty of the principal felony or misdemeanor 

may by law be tried, in the same manner as such receiver may be 

dea/f with etc in the county where he actually received such property ; " 

2t£25 Vict, e.96, *- 96. Therefore, where the stealing is in county A., 

sod tbereceirinfr 'in county B., both are triable in A., and the indictment 

mytBege bath the st ealing »nd reiving to have been in A. B. v. Bitdey, 

2 NUhReib 52i* & n ? w ** e ? e A '? ^ an( J ^' were indicted for stealing a 

ACP. 



50 Indictment. 

sheep in Dorsetshire, and one count of the indictment also charged C, as 
for a substantive felony, with receiving the sheep in Somersetshire, cot 
naming any one as the thief, he was held not to be triable for such receiving 
in Dorsetshire. R. v. Martin, 1 Den. 398 ; 18 L. J. (Jf . C.) 137. 

Receiving goods stolen abroad.] — The Larceny Act, 1896 (59 cfe 60 Vict. c. 
52) s. 1, sub-*. 1, enact?, u if any person, without lawful excuse, receives, 
or has in his possession, any property stolen outside the United 
Kingdom, knowing snch property to have been stolen ... he may be 
indicted in any county or place in which he has, or has had, the 
property." By subs. 2 : " For the purposes of this section, property shall 
be oeemed to have been stolen where it has been taken, extorted, obtained, 
embezzled, converted, or disposed of, under such circumstances that, if 
the act had been committed in the United Kingdom, the person committing 
it would have been guilty of an indictable offence, according to the law, 
for the time being, of the United Kingdom." By subs. 3 : "An offence 
under this section shall be a felony, or misdemeanor, according as the act 
committed outside the United Kingdom would have been a felony, or 
misdemeanor, if committed in England or Ireland." The cases to the 
contrary cited in Archbold (21st edj are therefore now no longer law. 

Mutiny.']— In indictments for endeavouring to seduce soldiers or sailors 
from their duty, or for inciting or stirring them up to mutiny, the venue 
may be laid in any county in England, whether the offence be committed 
on the high seas or in England. 37 G. 8, c 70, «. 2. 

Post-office offences.]— la indictments for offences against the Post-office 
Acts, the venue may be laid in the county or place in England or Ireland 
where the offence is committed, or where the offender is apprehended or is 
in custody ; and, if the offence be " committed in or upon or in respect of a 
mail, or upon a person engaged in the conveyance or delivery of a post letter- 
bag, or post-letter, or in respect of a post letter-bag, or post-letter, or a 
chattel, or money, or valnable security sent by the post," the venue may bo 
laid in the county where the offender is apprehended or is in custody, or 
in any county or place through any part whereof the mail, or the person, 
or the post letter-hag, or the post-letter, or the chattel, or the money, or 
the valuable security sent by the post, in respect of which the offence is 
committed, shall have passed in due course of conveyance or delivery by 
post : and, if the side, centre, or other part of a highway, or the side, bank, 
centre, or other part of a river, canal, or navigation, constitute the 
boundary of two counties, the venue may be laid in either county. 7 W m 
4, A 1 Vict. c. 36, s. 37. 

Public authorities and officers: offences by,] — In indictments against 
persons in the public service, or in the police, for larceny or embezzlement 
or fraudulent application or disposition of property in the possession 
or power of his Majesty, the venue may be laid in the county or place 
where the defendant is apprehended or is in custody, or in which the 
offence is committed. 24 <fc 25 Vict. c. 96, «. 70. 

Slave trade.]-' Offences in connection with the slave trade may be triod 
either where committed, or in Middlesex, or in any place where the 
accused for the time being is if it be within the King's dominions, or a 
place where his Majesty has jurisdiction under the Foreign Jurisdiction 
Acts. 36 <Sr 37 Vict, c 88, s. 26. 



The Statement: Statutes. 51 

Unlawful oaths.] — Offences against the Unlawful Oaths Ads of 1797 <fc 
1862, if committed on the high seas or outside the realm, or in England, 
may be tried by a court of oyer and terminer or gaol delivery for any 
erranty in England in the same manner as if committed in such county. 
37 Q. 3, c. 123, *. 6; 52 G. 3, c 104, *. 7. 

Wrecking.] — In indictments for plundering or stealing any part of any 
ship in distress or wrecked, stranded, or oast ashore, or any goods, 
merchandize, or articles of any kind belonging to such ship, the venue 
may be laid either in the county or place in which the offence was com- 
mitted, or in any county or place next adjoining. 21 <fc 25 Vict. c. 96, s. 61. 

2. The Statement. 

Statutes. 

7 Geo. 4, c. 61 (Criminal Law Act, 1826.) 

Sect. 19. Misnomer, want of addition.'] — And for preventing abuses 
frtjm dilatory pleas, be it enacted that no indictment or information 
shall be abated by reason of any dilatory plea of misnomer, or of want 
of addition, or of wrong addition of the party offering such plea, if the 
court shall be satisfied by affidavit or otherwise of the truth of such plea ; 
but in such case the court shall forthwith cause the indictment or infor- 
mation to be amended according to the truth, and shall call upon such 
party to plead thereto, and shall proceed as if no such dilatory plea had 
been pleaded. 

Sect. 21. Description of offences."] . . . Where the offence charged has 
been created by any statute, or subjected to a greater degree of punishment, 
or excluded from the benefit of clergy, by any statute, the indictment or 
information shall, after verdict, be held sufficient to warrant the punish- 
ment prescribed by the statute, if it describe the offence in the words of 
the statute (see post, p. 78). 

11 & 12 Vict. c. 46 (Criminal Procedure Act, 1848). 

Sect. 4. Amendment of certain misdescriptions, courts of assize.]— [" WJiereas 
a failure of justice frequently takes place in criminal trials by reason of 
variances between writings produced in evidence and the recital or setting 
forth thereof in the indictment or information, and the same cannot now be 
amended at the trial except in cases of misdemeanor ; " for remedy thereof 
bs rr ETAcnro, that] it shall and may be lawful for any court of oyer and 
terminer and general gaol delivery, if such court shall see fit so to do, 
to cause the indictment or information for any offence whatever, when 
any variance or Tariances shall appear between any matter in writing or 
m print produced in evidence ancf the recital or setting forth thereof in 
the indictment or information whereon the trial is ponding, to be forth- 
with amended in such particular or particulars by some officer of the 
court, and after such amendment the trial shall proceed in the same 
manner in all respects, both with regard to the liability of witnesses to 
be indicted for perjury and otherwise, as if no such variance or variances 

had appeared. „^ „ mM 

[By 9 G. 4, c. 15 (rep. 53 & 54 Vict. c. 33, s. 1), judges at Nisi 
Pnus, and courts of oyer and terminer and general gaol delivery, were em- 
powered to amend the record upon which any trial might be pending, in any 
indictment or information for any misdemeanor, where any variance should 



52 Indictment. 

appear letween any matter in writing or in print produced in evidence, and 
the rec'tal or setting forth thereof upon the record. By 11 & 12 Vict. c. 46, 
s. 4, the same powers were given to the same courts and judges in all criminal 
trials. 9 G. 4, c. 15, was held to apply only to cases in which a particular 
written instrument was professed to be set out recited; Byder v. Malbon, 3 
G. & P. 594 ; and only to mere verbal alterations, and not to omissions which 
altered the effect of the port set out. See B. v. Christian, 0. & Mar. 388 : 
B. v. Newton, 1 C & K. 469. And amendments were made under this statute 
very sparingly in criminal cases. B. v. Cooke, 7 0. & P. 559 : B. v. Hewing, 
9 0. & P. 786.] 

12 <fc 13 Vict. c. 45 {Quarter Sessions Act, 1849). 

Sect. 10. Amendments of certain misdescriptions by Courts of Quarter 
Sessions.'] — Every court of general or quarter sessions of the peace, on 
the trial of any offence within its jurisdiction, whenever any variance or 
variances shall appear between any matter in writing or in print pro- 
duced in evidence, and the recital or setting forth thereof in the indict- 
ment, shall have the same power in all respects to cause the indictment 
to be amended which is given to courts of oyer and terminer and general 
gaol delivery, with regard to offences tried before such last-mentioned 
courts, by virtue of an act of the twelfth year of her Majesty's reign, 
intituled " An Act for the Bemoval of Defects in the Administration of 
Criminal Justice " (11 <fe 12 Vict. c. 46, supra), and after such amendment 
the trial shall proceed in the same manner in all respects, both with regard 
to the liability of witnesses to be indicted for perjury and otherwise, as 
if no variance or variances had appeared. 

14 & 15 Vict. c. 100 (Criminal Procedure Act, 1851). 

["Whereas offenders frequently escape conviction on their trials by 
reason of the technical strictness of criminal proceedings in matters not 
material to the merits of the case : and whereas such technical strictness 
may safely be relaxed in many instances, so as to ensure the punishment 
of the guilty, without depriving the accused of any just means of 
defence : and whereas a failure of justice often takes place on the trial of 
persons charged with felony and misdemeanor by reason of variances 
between the statement in the indictment on which the trial is had and 
the proof of names, dates, matters, and circumstances therein mentioned, 
not material to the merits of the case, and by the misstatement whereof 
the person, on trial cannot have been prejudiced in his defence : " be it 

THEBEFOBE ENACTED . . . 8B follows : — J 

Sect. 1. Amendment of certain immaterial variances."] — From and after 
the coming of this Act into operation (Sept. 1, 1851), whenever on the 
trial of any indictment for any felony or misdemeanor there shall appear 
to be any variance between the statement in such indictment and the 
evidence offered in proof thereof, 

In the name of any county, riding, division, city, borough, town cor- 
porate, parish, township, or place mentioned or described in any such 
indictment ; 

Or in the name or description of any person or persons, or body 
politic or corporate, therein stated or alleged to be the owner or owners 
of any property, real or personal, which shall form the subject of any 
offence charged therein ; 

Or in the name or description of any person or persons, body politic 



The Statement: Statutes. 53 

or corporate, therein stated or alleged to be injured or damaged or 
intended to be injured or damaged by the commission of such offence ; 

Or in the christian name or surname, or both christian name and sur- 
name, or other description whatsoever, of any person or persons whomso- 
ever therein named or described ; 

Or in tho name or description of any matter or thing whatsoever 
therein named or described, or in the ownership of any property named 
or described therein ; 

It shall and may be lawful for the court before which the trial shall be 
had, if it shall consider snob variance not material to the merits of the 
case, and that the defendant cannot be prejudiced thereby in his defence 
on such merits, to order snch indictment to be amended, according to the 
proof, by some officer of the court or other person, both in that part of 
the indictment where such variance occurs and in every other part of the 
indictment which it may become necessary to amend, on such terms as to 
postponing the trial to be had before the same or another jury, as such 
court shall think reasonable ; and after any such amendment the trial 
shall proceed, whenever the same shall bo proceeded with, in the same 
manner in all respects, and.with tbe same consequences, both with respect 
to the liability of witnesses to be indicted for perjury and otherwise, as if 
no such variance had occurred ; and in case such trial shall be had at 
nisipriru, the order for the amendment shall be endorsed on the postea, 
and returned together with the record, and thereupon such papers, rolls, 
or other records of the court from which such record issued as it may be 
necessary to amend shall be amended accordingly by the proper officer ; 
and in all other cases the order for the amendment shall either be endorsed 
on the indictment or shall be engrossed on parchment, and filed, together 
with the indictment, among the records of the court : provided that in all 
such cases where the trial shall be so postponed as aforesaid, it shall bo 
lawful for snch court to respite the recognizances of the prosecutor and 
witnesses, and of the defendant, and his surety or sureties, if any, accord- 
ingly, in which case the prosecutor and witnesses shall be bound to 
attend to prosecute and give evidence respectively, and the defendant shall 
be bound to attend to be tried, at the time and place to which such trial 
shall be postponed, without entering into any fresh recognizances for that 
purpose, in such and the same manner as if they were originally bound 
by their recognizances to appear and prosecute or give evidence at the 
time and place to which such trial shall have been so postponed : pro- 
vided also that where any such trial shall lie to be heard before another 
jury, the Grown and the defendant shall respectively be entitled to tho 
challenges as they were respectively entitled to before the first jury 
sworn. 



Sect 2. Verdicts and judgments given after amendment to he valid.]— 
Every verdict and judgment, which shall be given after tbe making of 
any amendment under the provisions of this Act, shall be of tho same 
force and effect in all respects as if the indictment had originally been in 
the same form in which it was after such amendment had been made. 

Sect 31 Records to be drawn up in amended form,']— It it shall become 

fifftsaary at any time for any purpose whatsoever to draw up a formal 

neord in any case where any amendment shall have been made under the 

provisions of this Act, stichresord shall be drawn up in the form in which 

tbe indictment was after snch amendment was made, without taking any 

notice of the fact of each amendment having been made. 



54 Indictment. 

Sect. 5. Description of instruments in indictments for the stealing or 
destroying, etc., thereof.}— In any indictment f or . . . stealing, embezzling, 
destroying, or concealing, or for obtaining by false pretences any instru- 
ment it shall be sufficient to describe such instrument by any name or 
designation by which the same may be usually known or by the purport 
thereof, without setting out any copy or fac-simile thereof or otherwise 
describing the same or the value thereof. [The portions of thisenactment 
relating to forqery and uttering were repealed by 24 & 25 Vict. c. 95, s. 1, and 
re-enacted in 24 «f* 25 Viet. c. 98, s. 42, q.v. post, tit. "Forgery:*] 

24 * 25 Vict, c 98. 

Sect 42. Description of instruments in indictments for forgery, uttering, 
etc.] — post, tit. " loi'gery." 

14 & 15 Vict. c. 100. 

Sect. 7. Description of instruments.']— In all other cases wherever it shall 
be necessary to make any averment in any indictment as to any instrument 
whether the same consists wholly or in part of writing, print, or figures, it 
shall be sufficient to describe such instrument by any name or designation 
by which the same may bo usually known, or by the purport thereof, 
without setting out any copy or fac-simile of the whole or any part 
thereof. 

Sect. 18. Description of coin and banknotes as money.] — la every indict- 
ment in which it shall be necessary to make any averment as to any 
money or any note of the Bank of England or any other bank, it shall be 
sufficient to describe such money or bank note simply as money, without 
specifying the particular coin or bank note: and such allegations, so far 
as regards the description of the property, shall be sustained by proof of 
any amount of coin or of any bank note, although the particular species 
of coin of which such amount was composed, or the particular nature of 
the bank note, shall not be proved, and in cases of embezzlement and 
obtaining money or bank notes by false pretences by proof that tho offender 
embezzled or obtained any piece of coin or any bank note or any portion 
of the value thereof, although such piece of coin or bank note may have 
been delivered to him in order that some part of the value thereof should 
be returned to the party delivering the same or to any other person, and 
suoh part shall have been returned accordingly. 

Sect. 24. Certain general defects not to vitiate indictments.] — No indict- 
ment for any offence shall be held insufficient 

for want of the averment of any matter unnecessary to be proved, nor 

for the omission of the words as " appear by the record " or of the words 
with " force and arms," or of the words '• against the peace' 1 (post, p. 85), nor 

for the insertion of the words "against the form of the statute" instead 
of the words " against the form of the statutes " or vice versd (id.), nor 

for that any person mentioned in the indictment is designated by a 
name of office or other descriptive appellation, instead of by his proper 
name (post, p. 56), nor 

for omitting to state the time at which the offence was committed in any 
case where time is not of the essence of the offence (post, pp. 67, 94), nor 

for stating the time imperfectly, nor 

for stating the offence to have been committed on a day subsequent to 
the finding of the indictment, or on an impossible day, or on a day that 
never happened, nor 

for want of a proper or perfect venue (ante, p. 35), nor 



The Statement: Common Law. 55 

for want of a proper or formal conclusion (post, p. 85), nor 

for want of or imperfection in the addition of any defendant (post, p. 56), 

nor 
for want of the statement of the value or price of any matter or thing 

or the amount of damage, injury or spoil in any case where the value 

or price or the amount of damage, injury, or spoil is not of the essence of 

the offence (post, p. 77). 

Sect. 25. Challenging and amending formal defects.'] — Every objection to 
toy indictment for any formal defect apparent on the face thereof shall 
be taken, by demurrer or motion to quash such indictment, before the 
jury shall be sworn and not afterwards : and every court before which any 
such objection shall be taken for any formal defect may, if it be thought 
necessary, cause the indictment to be forthwith amended in such par- 
ticular by some officer of the court or other person ; and thereupon the 
court shall proceed as if no such defect had appeared. 

Sect 90. Definitions of Indictment and Property.'] — In the construction 
of this Act the word " indictment " shall be understood to include " infor- 
mation," " inquisition, 1 ' and " presentment," as well as indictment, and 
also any " plea," " replication," or other pleading, and any nisi prius 
record :* . . . and the term " finding of the indictment" shall be 
understood to include " the taking of an inquisition/' " the exhibiting 
of an information, and the making a presentment "... and the word 
" property "shall be understood to include goods, chattels, monoy, valuable 
securities, and every other matter or thing whether real or personal upon 
or in respect to which any offence may be committed. 

Common Law. 

In the statement, all the ingredients of the offence with which the 
defendant is charged, the facts, circumstances and intent constituting it, 
should be set forthwith certainty and precision, without any repugnancy 
and inconsistency, and the defendant should be charged directly and 
positively with having committed it 

At common law these rules were strictly enforced in favorem vitm (see 
2 Halt, 193). By reason of the change in the scale of punishments and of 
the enactments quoted above, they are relaxed to the extent below indi- 
cated under the several sab-headings. 

Certainty as to the party indicted.]— The defendant should bo described 
in the indictment by his christian name and surname. 2 Hale, 175. And 
when a corporation is indicted it should be described by its proper 
corporate name or style (see post, p. 65). Bat where the inhabitants of a 
parish are indicted for not repairing a highway, or the inhabitants of a 
county for not repairing a bridge, it is enongh to describe them as the 
inhabitants of a parish or county without naming any of them. 2 RoUe 
Ahr. 79 : 2 Hawk. c. 25, s. 68. 

Formerly it was necessary that the christian name of the defendant 
stated in the indictment should be such as he obtained at baptism or con- 
firmation ; see 2 RoUe Abr. 145 ; Co. Litt. 3, or both ; Walden v. Holmes, G 
Mod. 115 ; and sundry minute questions were raised as to whether a man 
could hare two christian names. 2 Hale, 175, and see Archbold Cr. PL 
(i&ad ed.) 47, 48. These refinements are rendered obsolete by 14 <fc 15 Vict, 
r. 100, ss. 1, % ante, p. 52. Under a. 1 the court may amend any variances 
between ibe indictment and the proof with respect to the christian name 
sod (or) surname of the accused, which appears immaterial to the merits 
of the case if the amendment will not prejudice the defence or the merits. 



66 Indictment* 

The surname may be such as the defendant has usually gone by or 
acknowledged ; and if there be a doubt which one of two names is his 
real surname, the second may be added in tho indictment after an alias 
dictus, thus : M Richard Wilson, otherwise coiled Richard Layer " (Bro. 
Misnom. 47). 

If the name of the prisoner be unknown, and he refuse to disclose it, 
be may be described as " a person whose name is to the jurors unknown, 
but who is personally brouaht be/ore them by the keeper of the prison;" but 
an indictmont against him as a person to the jurors unknown, without 
something to ascertain whom the grand jury meant to designate, would 
be insufficient Anon., R. <fe R. 489. 

Additions.]— It was formerly necessary, under 1 Ben. 5, c. 5 (the Statute 
of Additions) to add to the christian names and surnames of defendants 
the additions of their " estate or degre*, or mystery ," and also of the 
" towns, or hamlets, or places and counties of which they were or be, or 
in which they be or were conversant : " and many authorities are to be 
found in the books as to the sufficiency of the statement of these matters : 
estate and degree meaning the defendant's rank in life, mystery meaning 
his trade, art, or occupation ; but 1 Hen. 5, c 5, which became practically 
obsolete by reason of 7 0. 4, c. 61, s. 19, was repealed an to civil proceed- 
ings by 42 & 43 Vict. c. 59, and was repealed in toto by 46 & 47 Vict, c 49, 
«. 4 : and before the actual repeal of {ante, p. 51) 1 Hen. 5, c. 5, the provisions 
of 7 Q. 4, c. 64, s. 19 were extended, and the insertion of additions rendered 
unnecessary, by 14 & 15 Vict. c. 100, s. 24 (ante, p. 54), which enacts that no 
indictment of any offence shall be held insufficient " for want of or im- 
perfection in the addition of any defendant." 

Certainty as to the person against whom the offence was committed.'] — 
Names : — In indictments for offences against the persons or property of 
individuals, the christian name and surname of the party injured should 
be stated, if the party injured be known ; 2 Hawk. c. 25, *a. 71, 72 : R. v. 
Earl of Cardigan, 4 St. Tr., N. S. 601 ; for the murder of " John Styles," 
larceny of the goods of " John Styles," burglary in the dwelling-house of 
"John Styles," and therein stealing the goods of "John Nokes,'" and the 
like. If the name of the party injured be unknown to the prosecutor, as 
in the case of tho murder of a stranger, or larceny from the person of a 
stranger who does not come forward to prosecute, or the like, he may bo 
described in the indictment as a person unknown ; 2 Hale, 181 ; thus, a 
man may be indicted for the murder of, or for stealing the goods of, "a 
certain person to the jurors aforesaid unknown" Partridge v. Strange, 
Plowd. 77. The name if stated must be either the real name of the party 
injured, or that by which he is usually or best known ; Ji. v. Norton, B m 
& R. 510 : R. v. Berriman, 5 C. & P. 601 ; Anon., 6 C. & P. 403; R. T. J. 
Williams, 1 CAP. 298 : R. v. Gregory, 8 Q. B. 508 ; 15 L. J. (M. C.) 38 ; 
1 Cox, 263 : (see post, u Larceny : ") as, for instance, upon an indictment for 
the murder of a bastard child, it cannot be described by the name of its 
mother, unless that name has been gained by reputation. R. v. Clark, 
R.& R. 358 : R. v. Waters, 1 Mood. C. C.457; 7 C. & P. 250 : R.Y.Evans, 
8 C. & P. 765 : R. v. Stroud, 2 Mood. C. 6 T .270; 1 C. & K. 187. Abastard 
is quasi nullius filius, and can have no name or reputation immediately 
on birth : Co. Litt. 36 ; but may soon acquire a name by reputation. It. 
v. Scarborough, 3 Cox, 72. "Where, upon an indictment for the murder of 
a female bastard child, whose name was to the jurors unknown, it appeared 
that the child had not been baptized, bat that the mother, the prisoner. 



Description of Persons and Property. 57 

bad said thai she should like to have it called Mary Ann, and bad herself 
ailed it Mary Ann and Utile Mary, it was held that the child had not 
acquired a name by reputation. B. v. Smith, 1 Mood. C. C. 402; 6 C. & P. 
151. A child cannot be described as "a certain male infant of tender 
age, to wit, of the age of, etc., and not baptized." The indictment should 
either state its name, or, if it have no name, either by baptism or repu- 
tation (see B. t. Stroud, 2 Mood. C. C. 270; 1 C. & K. 187), state the name 
to be to the jurors unknown. B.y. Biss,2Mood. C. (7.93; 8 C. <fc P. 773 : 
R. v. Hicks, 2 M. & Boh. 302. Bat the absence of a name was held to be 
sufficiently accounted for by the child being described as " then lately 
before born of the body of A. B.; " B. v. Hogg, 2 M. <fe Bob. 380 ; see B.y. 
WiQis, 1 Den. 80 ; 1 C. & K. 722 ; or " a certain infant female child born 
of the bedy of A. B., and of tender age, to wit, of the age of two day?, and 
not named." B. ▼. Sarah Waters, 1 Den. 356 ; 18 L. J. (if. C.) 53 ; 3 Cox, 
200. Where the defendant was indicted for killing a woman whose name 
was to the jurors unknown, and who he sometimes said was his wife, and 
sometimes not, and there was no evidence of any name by which she 
was known, it was held, that if she was not his wife, and if her name could 
not be ascertained by any reasonable diligence, the description was correct. 
R. v. Campbell, 1 C. <t K. 82. No addition is requisite; 2 Hale, 162 ; and 
if stated it need not be proved ; 14 <fc 15 Vict. c. 100, a. 1 (ante, p. 52). 
Where it appeared that the party injured had a mother of the same name, 
the court held that it was not necessary to distinguish her in the indict- 
ment by the addition " the younger," although it was objected that in 
such a case, where such an addition is not given, the presumption is, that 
it is the parent and not the child that is intended ; and some cases were 
cited to that effect. B. v. Peace, 3 B. & Aid. 579. But where the person 
injured has a name of dignity, as a peer, baronet, or knight, he should be 
described by it ; and if he were described as a knight, when, in fact, he 
is a baronet, or the contrary, the variance would (but for the power of 
amendment given by 14 <fc 15 Vict. c. 100, a. 1, ante p. 52) be fatal, because 
a name of dignity (baronet, for instance) is not merely an addition, but 
is actually a part of the name. 2 Hawk. c. 25, ss. 71, 72 A baron has 
been held well described as Lord A. B. v. Pitts, 8 C. & P. 771 : B. v. 
Elliott, Id. 722 n. As to the proper mode of describing an Irish peer, see 
B. t. Graham, 2 Leach, 547 : B. v. Brinklett, 3 C. & P. 416 ; and the 
eldest son of a peer, Anon., 2 Salk, 451. An indictment for a libel upon 
a person who was formerly the reigning Duke of Brunswick and Lune- 
borg, but was then residing as a private person in this country, but 
commonly called the Dake of Brunswick, was held to describe him 
sufficiently as u C, Duko of Brunswick and Lnneburg." B. v. Gregory, 
8 Q. B. 503. So, "His Royal Highness the Duke of Cambridge " has 
been considered sufficient without setting forth any of his christian names. 
B. v. Frost, Dears. 474; 24 L. J. (M. C.) 116. But since 1851 (14 & 15 
Vict, c 100, a. 24, ante, p. 54) an indictment is not vitiated by describing a 
person by his name of office or other descriptive appellation instead of 
by his proper name. 

Property of deceased persons.'] — An indictment for stealing the shroud of 
a dead person must state it to be the goods and chattels of the executor 
or administrator ; 2 Hale, 181. If there bo no will and no administration, 
it may be laid to be the goods of the person who defrayed the expenses of 
the burial (B. v. Haynes, 12 Co. Bep. 113), or formerly of the ordinary, if 
the abroad were purchased with the money of the deceased ; 2 Hale, 181. 
So, if a coffin be stolen, it may be described in the same manner. If, 
from length of time, it be difficult to ascertain the personal representatives 



58 Indictment. 

of the deceased, the property stolen may be laid as the property of 
a person unknown; bat it cannot be described as the property of the 
churchwardens of the parish from which it was stolen. Anon., 2 East, 
P. C. 652. If goods, the property of a deceased person, be stolen after 
his death, and before administration granted, the property most formerly 
have been laid in the ordinary, and not in the administrator ; for the 
rights of the administrator commence only from the date of the letters of 
administration, and in this respect differ from those of an executor, 
which take effect from the death of his testator. B. v. Smith, 7 C. & P. 
147. " Bat it is conceived that the law is otherwise settled by Tharpe 
v. Millwood, 5 M.& Q. 760, and that the property may be laid in the 
administrator in respect of a thing stolen before the grant, though probably 
it may also be laid in the ordinary, of whom the administrator seems to 
be merely'the delegate or representative. 11 Possession in the Common Law, 
by Pdlock and Wright, 128. On an indictment for larceny, it was proved 
that the larceny took place after the death of the owner of the goods, 
and there was no proof of any will or letters of administration. The 
indictment laid the property as that of A. and B., who were not shown 
to be either executors or administrators of the deceased, bat it was 
proved that on the death of the owner they had taken on themselves 
the general charge of his property. The indictment was held to be good, 
and the property to be well laid in A. and B. B. v. King, 4 F. & F. 493. 
Where the stealing was from the person of a corpse in the highway, in 
the diocese of W., and it appeared that the last place of abode of the 
deceased person was in the diocese of Gk, but that he had left it, and 
was on his way to come to live with his father in the diocese of W., the 
property was held to bo well laid in the bishop of W. as ordinary. B. v. 
Tippin, C. & Mar. 545. Where some of the articles mentioned in an in- 
dictment for larceny were shown to have been in the possession of the 
deceased at the time of her death ; as to the others, it was shown that 
they had belonged to the deceased, and were taken, on the day of her 
funeral, by the defendant, to the house of A. ; and it was proved that 
search had been unsuccessfully made for a will in the deceased'^ drawers 
and boxes ; and that no administration had been taken out ; it was held, 
first, that there was sufficient evidence of an intestacy, and that the 
property was rightly laid in the ordinary ; secondly, that a conviction 
for larceny of all the articles mentioned in the indictment was proper. 
B. v. Johnson, Dears. & B. 340; 27 L. J. {M. C.) 52. By the Court of 
Probate Act, 1858 (21 & 22 Vict. c. 95), s. 19, " from and after the decease 
of any person dying intestate, and until letters of administration Bhall be 
granted in respect of his estate and effects, the personal estate and effects 
of such deceased person shall be vested in the judge of the Court of 
Probate for the time being, in the same manner and to the same extent 
as heretofore they vested in the ordinary. 1 ' And since this Act where the 
ordinary would have been at common law named as owner, it is usual to 
lay the property in " Sir A. B., President of the Probate, Divorce, and 
Admiralty Division of the High Court of Justice." Quxre, as to the effect 
of a. 1 of the Land Transfer Ad, 1897 (60 <fc 61 Vict. c. 65), which creates a 
real representative, on the description of the land of a deceased parson 
before and after administration is taken out. 

larceny from bailees.] — If property be stolen out of the possession of a 
bailee, it may be described in the indictment as the property either of the 
bailor or bailee ; 2 Hale, 181 ; although the goods were never actually in 
the real owner's possession, but in the possession of the bailee only. B. v. 
Bemnant, B. & B. 136 ; B. v. Wymer, 4 C. <fr P. 391. See Pollock and Wright 



Description of Property : Married Women. 59 

on Possession in the Common I/aw. As, for instance, goods left at an inD, 
R. y. Todd, 2 East, P. C 653, or entrusted to a person for safe keeping, 
R. v. Taylor, 1 Iitach, 356 : B. v. Statham, Id. 357 cit. ; or to a carrier for 
carriage, B. t. Deakin, 2 East, P. C. 653 ; 2 Leach, 862 ; see B. Y. Spears, 
2 Leich, 825 ; 2 £orf, P. 0. 568 ; cloth to a tailor to make into clothes ; 
linen to a laundress to wash, R. v. Packer, 2 East, P. C. 653 ; 1 Leach, 
357 n. ; goods pawned and the like — may be laid to be the goods and 
chattels of the person to whom they are so entrusted, etc., or of the 
owner, at the option of the prosecutor. See 2 Hale, 181 ; 1 Hale, 513 ; 
2 East, P. O. 652 ; 1 Hawk. c. 33, a. 47 ; R. ▼. Wilkin, 1 Leach, 520 ; 2 lb., 
875 cit. : 2 East, P. C 678. So, where cattle were alleged in the indict- 
ment to be the property of a person, who, it appeared in evidence, was 
merely the agister, and not the actual owner, the judges held it to be 
sufficient. B. v. Woodward, 2 East, P. C 653. So, where A. had taken 
a house in which B., his relation, carried on a trade for the benefit of A. 
and his family, having himself neither. a share in the property nor a 
salary, but having authority to sell any part of tho stock and to buy goods 
for the shop, accounting to A., it was held that B. was the bailee of the 
goods in the shop, and that they might be laid as his property. R. v. 
Bird, 9 CAP. 44. Iron stolen from the bed of a canal while it was being 
cleansed, was held to be well laid as the property of the canal company, 
though they were not themselves carriers of goods. R. v. Bowe, Bell, 93 ; 
28 L. J. (If. C) 128. But where a bailor steals his own goods from his 
bailee, they must be described in the indictment as the goods of the bailee. 
R. v. Wilkinson, R. & R. 470: R. v. Bramley, Id. 478. Where a bailee by 
mistake parts with the possession of a chattel to a person not entitled to 
it, his special property in it is not divested, and it may be described as 
his in the indictment. R. v. Vincent, 2 Den. 464; 21 L. J. (M. C) 109. 
Goods must not, however, be described as the property of one who has 
neither the actual nor constructive possession of them. R. v. Adams, 
R. & B. 225. Thus, if it appear that the person named as owner is 
merely servant to the real owner, the defendant (before 14 <& 15 Vict, 
c. 100, s. 1 (ante, p. 52) must have been acquitted ; 2 East, P. C. 652 ; for 
a servant has not a special property in the goods, the possession of the 
servant being the possession of the master. R. v. Hutchinson, R. & R. 
412 ; 2 Buss. Cr. (6th ed.) 264. A boy of fourteen living and working 
with his father, whom the father left in charge of a stall of goods, was 
held not to be a bailee in whom the property of goods stolen from the 
stall could be laid. R. t. Green, Dears. & B., 113 ; 26 L. J. (M. C.) 17 ; 
7 Cox, 186 (C C. R.). Where, however, the money had never been in 
the possession of the master, as where it was received by the servant for 
him, but he is robbed of it before his arrival at home, it was held that it 
should be laid as the property of the servant, not of the master. R. v. 
Budick, 8C&P. 237. 

Married uwmen.] — Where the person named as owner appears to be a 
married woman, the defendant must formerly, unless the indictment was 
amended, have been acquitted, because in law the goods were the property 
of the husband ; 1 Hale, 513 ; and must be described as such except where 
the woman had married after the larceny and before indictment found. 
B. v. Turner, 1 Leach, 536. Thus, where a married woman was sent by 
her husband to sell sheep, and receive the money ; she did so, and was 
robbed of 57., part of the price of tho sheep ; it was held that the money 
was properly described as the property of her husband. B. v. Boberts, 
7 C. <fc P. 485 ; even though the wife was living apart from her husband 
upon an income arising from property invested in trustees for her separate 



GO Indictment 

use, because the goods cannot be the property of the trustees ; and, in l*w, 
a married woman had formerly no property. R. v. French, R. & R. 491 ; 
see R. v. Wilford, Id. 517. This rnle of the common law that the wife 
could have no property was made subject to exceptions by statute where 
the husband and wife had been judicially separated, or where the wife 
had obtained a protection order ; 20 & 21 Vict. c. 85, ss. 21, 25 ; and is 
now virtually abolished by 45 & 46 Vict. c. 75 {Married Women's Property 
Act, 1882), which enacts, *. 12, that—" Every woman, whether married 
before or after this Act, shall have in her own name against all persons 
whomsoever, including her husband, the same civil remedies, and also 
(subject, as regards her husband, to the proviso hereinafter contained) 
the same remedies and redress by way of criminal proceedings, for the 
protection and security of her own separate property, as if such property 
belonged to her as a. feme sole, but, except as aforesaid, no husbana or wife 
shall be entitled to sue the other for a tort In any indictment or other 
proceedings under this section it shall be sufficient to allege such pro- 

Eerty to be her property; and in any proceeding under this section a 
usbond or wife snail be competent to give evidence against each other, 
any statute or rule of law to the contrary notwithstanding : Provided 
always, that no criminal proceeding shall be taken by any wife against 
her husband by virtue of this Act while they are living together, as to or 
concerning any property claimed by her, nor while they are living apart, 
as to or concerning any act done by the husband while they were living 
together, concerning property claimed by the wifo, unless such property 
shall have been wrongfully taken by tho husband when leaving or 
deserting, or about to leave or desert his wife : " and (*. 16) that "a 
wife doing any act with respect to any property of her husband which, if 
done by the husband with respect to property of tho wife, would make 
the husband liable to criminal proceedings by the wife under this Act 
shall in like manner be liable to criminal proceedings by her husband." 
It is not necessary that an indictment against a wife for stealing the goods 
of her husband should contain averments that the prisoner was the wife 
of the prosecutor, or that she took the goods in question when leaving or 
deserting, or about to leave or desert, her husband. R. v. James (1902), 
1 K. B. 541 ; 71 L. J. Q. B. 211 ; 20 Cox, 156 ; 66 J. P. 217 ; and see post, 
tit. "Larceny." 

Goods let with a ready-furnished lodging must, if a larceny of them be 
committed by a third person, bo described as the goods of the lodger, for 
the owner neither has nor is entitled to the possession ; R. v. Bektead, 
R. & R. 411; R. v. Brunswick, 1 Mood. C. C. 26; 2 Russ. Cr. (6th ed.) 
234 ; but if a larceny be committed by the lodger, then tho goods may bo 
described as the property of the owner, or person letting to hire. 24 <£ 
25 Vict. c. 96, s. 74 ; see R. v. Bealey, 1 Mood. C. C. 1 ; R. v. HurrelU Ry. & M. 
296. Goods seized under a writ of fitri facias may be described as tho 
goods of the party against whom tho writ issued ; for, although they are 
in custodui legis, the original owner continues to have a property in them 
until they are sold. R. v. Eastall, 2 Russ. Cr. (6th ed.) 264, 320. So if A. 
steals the goods of B., and afterwards 0. steals the same goods from A., 
they may be described as the goods of either B. or A., for the possession 
of the former is not divested by the tortious taking. R. v. Wilkins, 1 Leacli, 
52) ; 2 East, P. C. 673 ; see 2 East, P. C. 654. Sed quxre, whether under 
such circumstances, the goods can bo laid as the property of B. in in- 
dictment against C, for B. was out of possession when C. stole them. 
Possession in the Common Law, by Pollock and Wright, 152. Clothes or 
other necessaries furnished by a father to his child may, it seems, be laid 
as the property either of the father or of the child, particularly if the 



Description of Property: Joint Owners. 61 

child he of tender age. R. v. Baynes, 12 Co. Hep. 113; Anon. 2 Etst 

P. C. 654; but it is safer, perhaps, to allege them to be the property of 

the child. See R. v. Forsgate, 1 Leach, 463, 464, n. : R. v. Hughes, C. & 

Mar. 593. The prisoner worked in a mill in the same room with three 

fellow workmen, and was sent by them on paynight for the wages of the 

four to the cashier of the works. The cashier gave the money for the four 

to the prisoner, who never gave any of it to his fellow workmen. He was 

indicted for the larceny, and it was held that the property in the money 

should be laid in the workmen, and not in the proprietors of the works. 

J?, v. Barnes, L. R. 1 C: C. R. 46; 35 L. J. (M. C.) 204. The prisoners 

were charged with stealing brass, the property of H. The facts proved 

as to the ownership were that the brass was the property of a trading 

company (limited), and that it was seen on the company's premises about 

twelve days before it was missed ; that the company was being wound up ; 

and that H. was the official liquidator, but there was no proof that 6. 

had ever taken possession of the brass or dealt with it as his property. 

It was held that although this evidence was sufficient to show that H. 

might have had a title to the brass, it was not sufficient to show that it 

had ever become bis property, so as to warrant the property being laid 

in him in an indictment for larceny. R. v. Bell, 13 Cox, 623 (0. C. R.). 

Property of joint owners.] — " In any indictment or information for any 
felony or misdemeanor whereon it shall be requisite to state the owner- 
ship of any property whatsoever, whether real or personal, belonging to 
or in the possession of more than one person, whether partners in trade, 
joint tenants, parceners or tenants in common, it shall be sufficient to 
name one of such persons and to state such property to belong to the 
person so named, and another or others, as the case may be : and when- 
ever in any indictment for felony or misdemeanor it shall be necessary to 
mention for any purpose whatsoever any partners, joint tenants, parceners, 
or tenants in common, it shall be sufficient to describe them in the manner 
aforesaid : and this provision shall be construed to extend to all joint 
stock companies and trustees. 1 ' 7 0. 4 c, 64, s. 14. In an indictment for 
stealing a bible, a hymn-book, etc., from a methodist chapel, the goods 
were laid as the property of John Bennett and others, and it appeared 
that Bennett was one of the society and a trustee of the chapel : Parke, J., 
held that the property was laid correctly. R. v. Boulton, 5 C. & P. 637. 

But it is not necessary that a strict legal partnership should exist. 
Where G. and D. carried on business in partnership, and the widow of 
C, upon his death, without taking out administration, acted as partner, 
and the stock was afterwards divided between her and the surviving 

Eartner, but, before the division, part of the stock was stolen, it was 
olden that the goods were properly described as the joint property of 
the surming partner and the widow, upon an objection that the children 
of C. ought to have been joined, or the goods described as the property 
of the surviving partner and the ordinary, no administration having been 
taken out. R. v. Qaby, R. & R. 178. And where a father and son took 
a farm on their joint account, and kept a stock of sheep, their joint 
property, and, upon the death of the son, the father carried on the busi- 
ness for the joint benefit of himself and his son's children, who were 
infants, it was holden, upon an indictment for stealing sheep bred from 
the joint stock, some before and some after the death of the son, that the 
property was well laid in the father and his son's children. R. v. Scott, 
R. <fc R. 13 ; 2 East, P. C. 655. The property in money stolen by the 
prisoner from the shop of an industrial society in which he is a partner, 
is well laid in tho solo manager of the business, who is also a partner in 



62 Indictment. 

the society and in possession of the shop, and responsible to the society 
for all moneys coming into his possession. R. v. Webster, L. & £.77 : 
31 L. J. (M. C.) 17. So, where the prisoner stole money from the shop of 
an industrial society of which he was a member, and one of the committee 
of management, and the shop was under the management of a boy of 
thirteen, who accounted daily to the treasurer of the society for the 
moneys received by him, it was held that the property in the money was 
well laid in the boy. R. v. Burgess, L. & C. 299 : 32 L. J. (M. C.) 185. 
A box belonging to a benefit society was stolen from a room in a public- 
house ; two of the stewards had keys of this box, and by the rules of the 
society the landlord ought to have had a key, but, in fact, had not ; it was 
held that the prisoner might be convicted on a count laying the property 
in the landlord alone. R. v. Wymer, 4 C. & P. 391. See R. v. Cain, C. k 
Mar. 309 : 2 Mood. 0. C. 204. As to larceny or fraudulent conversion by 
trustees (24 & 25 Vict. c. 96, s. 80), by directors of companies (Id. s. 81), 
by members of oo-partnersbip and beneficial owners (31 <fe 32 Vict, c 116, 
8. 1), by persons entrusted with property for a special purpose (1 Edw. 7, 
c. 10), see post, tit. " Fraudulent Conversion." 

Property of Joint Stock Banks.] — By the Country Bankers Act, 1826 
(7 G. 4 c. 46), s. 9, in indictments or informations by or on behalf of joint- 
stock banking co-partnerships, for stealing or embezzling money, goods, 
effects, bills, notes, securities or other property belonging to them, or for 
any fraud, forgery, crime or offence committed against or with intent to 
injure or defraud such co-partnerships, the money, etc., may be stated to 
be the property of, and the intent may be laid to defraud, any one of the 
public officers of such co-partnerships ; and the name of any one of their 
public officers may be used in all indictments or informations where it 
otherwise would be necessary to name the persons forming the company. 
It was at one time considered that, in an indictment against a person not 
a member of the company, under 7 G. 4, c. 46, s. 9, or in an indictment 
under 1 & 2 Vict. c. 96 (continued and extended by 3 <fe 4 Vict. c. Ill, and 
made perpetual as so extended by 5 <fc 6 Vict. c. 85, s. 1), against a share- 
holder in a joint-stock banking company, for stealing or embezzling tho 
goods or money of the company, the intent must be alleged to bo to defraud, 
or the property must be laid in, a public officer of the company, duly 
appointed and registered under the Acts. Chapman v. Mil vain, 5 Ex. 
61 ; see R. v. Atkinson, 2 Mood. C. C. 278 : C. & Mar. 525. These acts 
apply only to certain unincorporated partnerships, and it has been held 
that 7 G. 4, c. 64, s. 14, applies to such partnerships, and that, under it, 
an indictment laying the property in one of the members of the company, 
and others is proper. R. v. Pritchard, L. & C. 34 j 30 L. J. (M. C.) 169. 1 
Russ. Cr. (6th ed.) 80, note by Mr. Greaves. Where a banking company is 
registered under the Companies Act, 1862, 25 <fc 26 Vict, c 89, the property 
may be laid in the company by its corporate name. See sect. 18. 

County Property.] — " In any indictment or information for any felony 
or misdemeanor committed in, upon, or with respect to any bridge, court, 
gaol, house of correction, infirmary, asylum, or other public building, 
erected or maintained in whole or in part at the expense of any county, 
riding or division, or on or with respect to any goods, or chattels whatso- 
ever, provided for or at the expense of any county, etc., to be used for 
making, altering, or repairing any bridge or any highway at the ends 
thereof, or any court or other such building as aforesaid, etc., or to be used 
in or with any such court or other building, the property, whether real or 
personal, may be described as belonging to the inhabitants of such county, 



Description of JProperty : of Parish. 63 

etc, Mtkont specifying their names." 7 G. 4, c 64, «. 15. See 1 Russ. Cr. 
(6th ed.) 27 n. County gaols and houses of correction are now vested in 
the prison commissioners (40 <fe 41 Vict. e. 21, «. 48). The other property 
referred to in this enactment is now for the most part, if not wholly, 
Tested in the comity council of the administrative county by 51 <fe 52 Vict. 
41, s. 3 Qy.) and may he laid in such council by its corporate name ; and 
property of a county not specified in the enactment may be described as 
&e property of the County Council. 

Parish Property S\ — In indictments for stealing, taking or carrying away, 
or baying or receiving goods, chattels, furniture, provisions, clothes, linen 
and wearing apparel, boot materials, utensils, materials or things had, 
bought, procured or provided for the use of the poor of any parish, town- 
ship or hamlet, the property may he laid in " the overseers for the time being* 
of the parish, township or hamlet, without stating or specifying the 
names of any of them. 55 G. 3, c. 137, s. 1. See R. v. Went, R. <fc R. 359. 
"In any indictment or information for any felony or misdemeanor com- 
mitted in, upon, or with respect to any workhouse or poor-house, or on or 
vith respect to any goods or chattels whatsoever, provided for the use of 
the noor of any parish or parishes, township or townships, hamlet or 
hamlets, place or places, or to he used in any workhouse or poor-house in 
or belonging to the same, or by the master or mistress of such workhouse 
or poor-bouse, or by any workmen or servants employed therein, the 
property may be described as belonging to the overseers of the poor for the 
time being of such parish, etc., without specifying their names/' 7 G. 4, 
c64,t. 16. By the Poor Law Act, 1835 ( 5 tfe 6 W. 4 e. 69), ». 7, the 
guardians of the poor of every union formed under the Poor Law Amend- 
neat Act, 1834 (4 & 5 W. 4, c. 76), and of every parish placed under the 
control of a board of guardians by virtue of that Act, are made a corpora- 
tion by the name of the " Guardians of the poor of the union, (or of 

the parish of ,) in the county of ; ' and as such corporation are 

empowered to accept, take, and hold for the benefit of the union or parish 
any buildings, lands or hereditaments, goods, effects, or other property; 
and by that name to bring actions, to prefer indictments, etc ; and in every 
such action or indictment relating to any such property, it shall be 
sufficient to lay or state the property to be that of tho guardians of 

the union, or of tho parish of . 

The Poor Law Amendment Act, 1842 (5 <fc 6 Vict. c. 57), «. 16, empowers 

boards of guardians to accept and hold on behalf of their union or parish 

any lands, buildings, goods, effects, or other property as a corporation and 

in all cases to sue and be sued in their corporate name. Except in cases 

within that section the legal estate in such property vested in overseers by 

55 0. 3,c. 137, is not divested by the subsequent Poor Law Acts, Doe d. 

Svrton v. Webster, 12 Jl & E. 442. In rural parishes the legal estate of 

the overseers in certain of the property held for parish purposes is now 

vested in the parish council, or if there is none, in the chairman of the parish 

meeting and the overseers. (56 <fc 57 Vict, c 73, m. 5, 19, 52 (5) ). But 

notwithstanding the last-mentioned statute, an assistant overseer, indicted 

for embezzling money collected by him from the ratepayers, is still 

properly described in the indictment as tho servant of the inhabitants of 

the parish, and the money so embezzled is rightly laid as the property of 

such inhabitants. B. v. Smallman [1897] 1 Q. B. 4: 66 L. J. Q. B. 82 

(C. a £.) : IS Oar, 451. 

In respect of any indictment or any criminal proceeding every collector 
or assistant overseer appointed under the authority of any order of the 
Local Gorernment Board shall be deemed and taken to be the servant of 



64 Indictment 

the inhabitants of the parish whose money or other property be shall be 
charged to hare embezzled or stolen, and shall be so described ; and it 
shall be sufficient to state any such property to belong to the inhabitants 
of such parish without the names of any such inhabitants being specified. 
12 & 13 Vict. c. 105, s. 15. The orders governing the appointment of 
assistant overseers and collectors are tabulated in the Index to the Statutory 
Rules and Orders Revised (ed. 1904), tit. " Poor, England." 

Highway authorities^] — "In any indictment or information, for any 
felony or misdemeanor, committed on or with respect to any materials, 
tools, or implements provided for making, altering, or repairing any high- 
way, within any parish, etc., otherwise than by the trustees or commis- 
sioners of any turnpike road, it shall be sufficient to aver that any such 
things are the property of the surveyor or surveyors of the highways for 
the time being of such parish, township, hamlet or place, and it shall not 
be necessary to specify the name or names of any such surveyor or 
surveyors." 7 G. 4, c. 64, *. 16. 

Under the present law local authorities have in all cases been made 
surveyors of the highways within their districts, i.e. in a borongh or 
urban district, the town council or urban district council. (38 <& 39 Vict, 
c. 55, 8. 144.) And the materials, implements, etc., are vested in borough 
and urban councils by 38 & 39 Vict, c 55, «. 149, and the materials, etc., 
vest, in rural districts, in the rural district councils, as successors to High- 
way; Boards. (25 <fc 26 Vict c. 61, s. 11 ; 56 & 57 Vict, c, 73, s. 25.) 

In London the Metropolitan Borough Councils are surveyors of highways 
as to all roads within their districts except certain bridge approaches and 
embankments vested in the L.G.C. (18 <fe 19 Vict. c. 20, s. 96 : 62 & 63 Vict, 
c. 14, s. 6.) 

Main roads and their materials in every county but London vest in the 
county council. 51 & 52 Vict. c. 41, s. 11 (6). 

Commissions of sewers.'] — " In any indictment or information for any 
felony or misdemeanor committed on or with respect to any sewer, or other 
matter within or under the view, cognizance, or management of any com- 
missioners of sewers, it shall be sufficient to state any such property to 
belong to the commissioners of sewers, within or under whose view, 
cognizance, or management any such things shall be ; and it shall not be 
necessary to specify the names of any of such commissioners." 7 (?. 4, c 
64, *. 18. 

Crown property.] — Moneys, chattels, or valuable securities stolen or 
embezzled by persons in the public service, or by constables or other 
persons employed in the police of any county, city borough, district, 
or place whatsoever, may be described as the property of the King. 
24 & 25 Vict. c. 96, ss. 69, 70. 

Property of societies.] — The moneys, goods, chattels, securities for 
money, and all other effects whatever, belonging to any friendly society, 
or any branch of a friendly society, must be stated to be the property 
of the trustees for the time being, in their proper names as trustees for 
the society or branch (as the case may be) without further description. 
R. v. Marks, 10 Cox, 367; 59 <fe 60 Vict. c. 25, s. 51 ; from which it follows 
that the trustees cannot be guilty of larceny in stealing the property of 
the society. R. v. Loose, Bell, 259 ; 29 L. J. {M. C.) 132 ; 8 Cox, 302 ; 
unless, besides being trustees, they are also part beneficial owners thereof. 
31 <fc 32 Vict c. 116, s. 1 : post, tit " Larceny." The property in money, etc., 



Description of Property, 65 

belooging to registered industrial and provident societies, should be laid 
in the society by its corporate name. See 56 & 57 Vict c. 39, w. 3. 21. 
The same is true of societies within the Building Societies Acts. 37 <fc 38 
Viri. e. 42, s. 9. The property in money, etc., belonging to a registered 
trade anion should be laid in the person or persons for the time being 
holding the office of trustee, in his or their proper name or names, as 
trustees of snch trade nnion, without any fnrther description. 34 <£- 35 
Vict. <x 31, *. 8 : 39 <fe 40 Vict. c. 22, s. 3. The same rale applies as to the 
pr op er ty of trustee savings banks, 26 & 27 Vict. c. 87, s. 10 ; R. v. Bull, 1 
Cox, 137; and of loan societies, 3 & 4 Vict, c 110, s. 8. In the case both 
of friendly societies and industrial and provident societies and trade 
anions, the property may also be laid in the person in whose possession 
the money, etc, was at the time it was stolen, and who was accountable 
to the society or nnion for it. See ante, p. 61. 

Ckdtea Hospital property.'] — In indictments for stealing, pawning, 
Felling, buying, exchanging, receiving, embezzling, secreting, or disposing 
of, or not accounting for clothes, linen or other goods, belonging to the hos- 
pital at Chelsea, or the commissioners thereof, the property may be laid to 
be in "The Lords and others, Commissioners of the royal hospital for 
soldiers at Chelsea, in the county of Middlesex : " and in all prosecutions 
under the Chelsea Hospital Act, 1826 (7 G. 4, c. 16), it is sufficient to charge 
the act as done with intent to defraud " the Lords and others, Commissioners 
of the royal hospital for soldiers at Chelsea in the county of Middlesex," 
in any case in which it is necessary to state a particular intent to 
defraud, 7 G. 4, c. 16, *. 35. 

Post Office propcrfy.]—In indictments for stealing post letters, etc., etc., 
the property may be laid in the Postmaster-General ; 7 W. 4 <fc 1 Vict. c. 36, 
«. 40; and in indictments for offences committed in respect of telegraphic 
messages sent by or entrustel to the Postmaster-General, the property 
of snch telegraphic messages may be laid in him. 31 & 32 Vict. c. 110, 
s. 21; 32 <fc 33 Vict. c. 73, s. 23. 

Customs property.']- -Any moneys, chattels, or other valuable securities, 
which shall or may be received by any officer, clerk, or other person in the 
service of the customs, either as duties of customs, or under or by 
virtne of any statute, or by the order or direction of the commissioners 
of customs, or in virtue of his office or employment, or otherwise, 
for the use and service of his Majesty or of any public department, shall 
be deemed to be moneys, chattels or valuable securities for the public 
Fervice, and shall be considered as such within the meaning of the 
Larceny Act, 1861 (24<&25 Vict, c 96), and in any information, indictment 
or other instrument in relation thereto, the same may be laid as the 
property of his Majesty. 39 <fc 40 Vict. c. 36, s. 29. 

Bankrupts estate,'] — In indictments for stealing or embezzling property 
rested in the trustee of a bankrupt, by virtue of his appointment, such 
trustee may be designated as " the trustee of the property of A. B., a 
bankrupt," without inserting the proper name of the trustee. 46 & 47 
Tvd. c. 52, s. 8S. 

Corporation property J\ — Property vested in a body of persons should 
sot be had ss the property of that body, unless it be incorporated, but 
should be described, as the property of the individuals who constitute 
(bit body or of eome of them, as in the case of partners, trustees, or 

ajlt. ' 5 



66 Indictment. 

unincorporated joint-stock companies, R. v. Sherrington, 1 LeacJi, 513 : 
R. v. Beacall, 1 Mood. C. C. 15. Bat when goods of a corporation are stolen, 
they should be laid to bo the property of the corporation, in their corporate 
name, and not in the names of the individuals who compose it ; R. v. 
Patrick, 2 East, P. C. 1059 ; 1 Leach, 253 ; and there is a difference in 
this respect between an ancient corporation and a corporation newly 
created. An ancient corporation may by use have a special name, 
differing in substance from that by which they were originally incorpo- 
rated, and they may plead and be impleaded by that name ; but a corpo- 
ration created within memory must plead and be impleaded by the namo 
by which they wera incorporated. 10 Co. Rep. 29 b. ; Hob. 211 ; Noy. 54 ; 
2 Brownl. 292; Latch. 229; 3 Mod. 6; Cro. £fc.851; Bac. Air. Corp. 
(C. 3). This in case of a municipal corporation is the name specified in 
their charter of incorporation. 

In the case of, metropolitan borough councils it is the name given by 
the order creating the council or by letters patent subsequently issued. 

In the case of urban, rural, or parish councils, the corporate name is 
that stated in the order constituting them. At boards of guardians, see 
ante, p. 63. 

Most of the trading companies, familiarly known as joint-stock com- 
panies, aro now incorporated under the Companies Acts, 1862 to 1900 
(25 <£ 26 Vict. c. 89, etc. ; sec a. 18). Where on an indictment against tho 
prisoner as servant to A. and others, for embezzlement, proof was given 
that the prisoner was servant to a trading company, calling itself " The 
B. Goal Company, Limited ; " that this name was over the office door of 
tho company ; that there were eighty shareholders, of whom A. was one; 
that its affairs were managed by directors ; that its shares were trans- 
ferable by certificate without the consent of tho other shareholders ; and 
that a minute book of resolutions was kept, but no certificate of incor- 
poration was put in evidence, — it was held that there was no evidence 
that the company was incorporated, and that on the evidence tho prisoner 
was properly alleged in the indictment to be the servant of A. ana others. 
R. v. Frank-land, L. ct- C. 276; 32 L. J. (M. V.) 69. The existence of a 
company under its corporate name is sufficiently proved by parol evidence 
that it has carried on business under that name. J?, v. Langton, 2 
Q. B. D. 296; 46 L. J. (M. C.) 136; 13 Cox, 345. But it is preferable to 
prove the existence and name of the company by the certificate of 
incorporation : R. v. May, 64 J. P. 570. (a) 

Amendment of misdescriptions.] — Prior to 14 Jb 15 Vict, c 100, s$. 1, 24 
(ante, pp. 52, 54), variances, if material, were fatal, and could not be 
amended. 2 East, P. C, 651, 781. 

For the old law as to immateriality of variances where the words 
were idem sonant ia (see 1 Chit. Cr. L., 216 : Archbold y Cr. PL (22nd ed.) 
58, 59. 

Certainty as to age of person injured.'] — Where it is essential to con- 
stitute the offence that the party injured should have been of a certain 
age, the party must be stated in every count of the indictment to be of 

(a) As to judicial notice of the incorporation of a company referred to in a statute, 
fee It. v. Connelly 6 Qneentland, L. «/., 209. 

It is not clear that It. v. iAington could be applied to a foreign corporation, It. v. 
\Vhitrh<tMw % 6 Queenrland L. ./.'. 313, Griffith, ('. J., but it would teem to apply to 
companies proved to carry on business uncfer a name containing the word ** limited." 
A*, v. Catrley, 7 Qneevrhn*i L. ./. 4,">, 



Statement of Age, Time and Place. 6? 

that age ; and it will not be sufficient to state the age in the first count 
only, and in a subsequent count merely to describe the party as " the 
said A. B." B. v. Martin, 9 C. & P. 213. See B. v. Sarah Waters, 1 Den. 
356; 18 L. J. (M. C.) 53; 3 Cox, 303. 

Certainty as to time and place.'] —Under 14 <fc 15 Vict. c. 100, s. 24 (ante. 
p. 54) immaterial defects as to statement of time or place are not fatal 
to an indictment. See B. y. Nicholls, 68 J. P. 452 (C. C. B.). Formerly 
time and place must have been laid with certainty. The date, and in 
certain cases (see post, local description) the place of the offence, should be 
stated in the indictment. Staundf., 95 a: B. v. Hollond, 5 T. B. 607: 
B. v. Aylett, 1 T. B. 63, 69 : B. v. Haynes, 4 if. <fc Sel. 214. But it never 
was necessary that they should be laid according to the truth, unless time 
was of the essence of the offence, or unless local description was required, for 
in other cases if the time stated were previous to the finding of the 
indictment, and the place were within the county or other extent of the 
court's jurisdiction, a variance between the indictment and evidence in 
the time when the offence was committed, 2 Co. Inst. 318 ; 3 Co. Inst. 230 : 
*S*V //. Vane's case, Kd. (J.), 16 ; B. y. Aylett, uhi supra, or in the place 
where committed, provided the place proved were within the jurisdiction of 
the court, 2 Hawk. c. 25, s. 81, was not material. And for this reason, in 
practice all the facts in an indictment usually were stated to have occurred 
at the same time and place, time and special venue being laid as to the 
first fact, and afterwards referred to by the words " then and there" as to 
the others. Where larceny of a number of articles is charged without 
specification of time the prosecution may be put to elect as to the three 
cases on which they will proceed if the evidence proves that the articles 
were taken on different occasions : B. v. Nicholls, ubi supra. 

The time, if laid, should be the day of the month and year upon which 
the act is supposed to have been committed. In no case is it necessary 
to state the hour at which the act was done, unless rendered essential by 
the statute upon which the indictment is framed. 2 Hawk. c 25, s. 76. 
See Combe v. Pitt, 3 Burr, 1423, 1434: B. v. Clarke, 1 BuUt. 203; March, 
pi. 127 ; 2 Co. Inst. 318. In burglary, indeed, it is usual to state it ; but 
alleging the offence to have been committed " in the nigJU" without men- 
tioning the hour, seems to be sufficient ; but see 1 Hale, 549 ; 2 Hawk, 
c 25, «*. 76, 77: B. v. Waddington, 2 East, P. C. 513. And an indict- 
ment for burglary, alleging that the offence was committed "burgla- 
riously," but without any statement of time or " in the night" has been 
held good. B. v. Thompson, 2 Ccx, 377. In an indictment under the 
Night Poaching Act, 1828 (9 G. 4, c. 69), for unlawfully entering or being 
in a close by night for the purpose of taking game, armed, it is not neces- 
sary to state the hour of the night Davies v. B., 10 B. & C. 89. Where 
a time is limited for preferring an indictment, the time laid should 
appear to be within the time so limited. See B. v. Brown, M. & M. 163 ; 
and post, p. 94. 

Local description or special venueJ] — Formerly, the place (or special venue, 
as it is technically termed) must have been such as in strictness the jury 
who are to try the cause should come from. But since 1851 the common 
law has been to a great extent abrogated (see Stephen, 1 Hist. Cr. L. 281 ; as 
14 & 15 Vict. c. 100, «. 23 (ante, p. 35)), makes it unnecessary to state any 
Yenue in the body of an indictment ; but requires a local description to 
be inserted when necessary. 

The cases in which local description seems to be required are, keeping 
disorderly houses ; burglary (Buss. Cr.. (6th ed.) 44; i?. y. St. John, 9 C. 



68 Indictment. 

& P. 40) ; housebreaking (B. v. Bullock, 1 Mood. C. C. 324 n.) ; stealing 
in a dwelling-house (B. v. Napper, 1 Jlfborf. C. C 44) ; poaching or being 
armed at night on land for the purpose of killing game (B. v. Ridley, 
B. & B., 515) ; being found by night armed with intent to break into a 
dwelling-house, etc., and to commit a felony therein (B. v. Jarrald, L. & C. 
801 ; 32 L. J. (M. C.) 258) ; pacrilege (post, tit. " Burglary," etc.) ; riotously 
demolishing churches, houses, machinery, etc (B. v. Bichards. 1 M. & 
Bob. 177) ; maliciously firing a dwelling-house, perhaps an out-houro, but 
not a stack (B. v. Woodward, 1 Mood. C. C. 823) ; forcible entry (2 Leon* 
186) ; nuisances to highways (B. v. Stcventon, 1 C. & K. 55 ; 4 Chit. Cr. L. 
423); malicious injuries to sea banks, mill dams, or other local property, 
1 Taylor, Ev. (9th ed.), p. 209. 

At the Central Criminal Court, the present practice is to insert the 
parish in all indictments, in order that the taxing officers of the court 
may see at a glance to which part of the Central Criminal Court district 
the case belongs, and upon what county treasurer the order for costs 
should be made. 

It also enables the High Court, if the indictment is removed by certio- 
rari, to determine in what county it should ba tried. B. v. Connop, 4 A. 
& E. 942 ; and see Cr. Off. Bules, 1888, r. 41. 

Before 1851 it was necessary to state accurately the dates of written 
instruments ; but the mode of describing such instruments is now regu- 
lated by 14 & 15 Vict. c. 100, ss. 5, 7 (ante, p. 54), and under s. 1 of the 
same statute (ante, p. 52), the court may amend variances which it considers 
immaterial between the statement in the indictment and the evidence as 
to " the nflme or description of any matter or thing therein named or 
described." 

Certainty as to the facts, circumstances and intent constituting the offence.'] 
—Every offence consists of certain acts done or omitted under certain 
circumstances (ante, p. 11, 33) ; and as a general rule in an indictment for 
the offence, it is not sufficient to charge the defendant generally with 
having committed it, as, that he stole the goods of J., or committed 
burglary in the house of J. S., or the like ; but every fact or circumstance 
which constitutes or is a necessary ingredient in the offence must be 
specifically and categorically stated in the indictment. 

The offence must appear upon the face of the indictment to be a 
distinct substantive offence; you cannot charge a man with being a 
common thief, a common champertor or conspirator, common malefactor, 
or common robber ; but if he have committed a larceny, robbery, etc., the 
indictment must set forth every fact and circumstance whioh is a neces- 
sary ingredient in the offence. Thus, an indictment for extortion, charging 
that the defendant took extorsive! v for every horse so much, and for every 
twenty sheep so much, was held bad : because it charged the defendant with 
extortion generally, and not upon any particular occasion. B. v. Roberts, 
4 Mod. 101; 11 Show. 389. So, that the defendant was a calumniator, 
and a common and turbulent breaker of the peace, etc., was held bad for 
the same reason. B. v. Taylor, 2 Str. 849 ; B. v. Cooper, Id. 1246 ; 2 Hole, 
182. And the same where a constable was indicted for behaving badly and 
negligently in the execution of his office, without specifying any particular 
instance of negligence, etc. B. v. Winteringhani, 1 Str. 2. See also B. v. 
O'Callaghan, 14 Cox, 499. The exceptions to this rule are : — 

1. In indictments and inquisitions for murder or manslaughter it is 
now unnecessary to set forth the manner in which or the means by which 
the death was caused. 24 & 25 Vict, c 100, s. 6. 

2. A person may be indicted for being "a common barrator," without 



Statement of Element* of Crime, CO 

detailing tbe particulars of the barratry ; F Anson v. Stuart, 1 T. R. 748, 
752, 754 ; 1 R. R. 392 ; bat according to Hawkins, bk. 1, c. 81, s. 13, it is 
settled practice not to let the prosecutor try an indictment of this kind 
until he has given to the defendant particulars of the matters which he 
proposes to prove. See R. v. Curwood, 3 A. & E. 815. 

3. A woman may be indicted for being: " a common scold," without 
detailing the particulars of her conduct. P Anson v. Stuart, ubi supra, 

4. A person may be indicted for keeping a common gambling-house or 
bawdy-house, without stating those circumstances which it may be 
necessary to give in evidence to show that it is a house of that description : 
Jd. y and see 2 Hawk, c 25, ss. 57, 59. 

5. In an indictment for soliciting or inciting to the commission of a 
crime, R. v. Higgins, 2 East, 5 ; 6 R. R. 615, or for aiding and assisting in 
the commission of it, it is not necessary to state the particulars of the 
incitement or solicitation, or of the aid or assistance, nor to state the 
offence contemplated with the precision which would be required as an 
indictment for the full offence : and this, it would seem, eveu where the 
fall was actually committed. Thus in an indictment framed upon 37 O. 
3, e. 70, which enacts that any person who shall maliciously and advisedly 
endeavour to seduce any person serving in his Majesty's forces from his 
duty and allegiance shall be guilty of felony, it is unnecessary to state 
the means by which the prisoner had endeavoured to sednco the soldier 
from his duty and allegiance. R. v. Fuller, 2 Leach, 790 ; 1 B. & P. 180. 
With respect to the description of the solicitation or endeavour it seems 
that general words are sufficient, because the endeavour, attempt, or solici- 
tation is in general mado up of a number of petty circumstances, which 
cannot be set out on the record. 1 Stark. Cr. PI. 146 (2nd ed.). 

6. In an indictment or information for bribery or undue influence at a 
parliamentary election, it is sufficient to allege that the defendant was, 
at tbe election at or in connexion with which the offence is intended to 
be alleged to have been committed, guilty of bribery or undue influence 
(as the case may require). 26 <fc 27 Vict. c. 29, s. 6. By s. 53 of the 
Corrupt and Illegal Practices Prevention Act, 1883 (46 & 47 Vict. c. 51), 
this enactment is extended to any prosecution or indictment for the 
offence of any corrupt practice within the meaning of the following 
statutes, viz., at parliamentary elections, 46 & 47 Vict. c. 51 {Corrupt 
and Uleaal Practices Prevention Act, 1883), *. 53 : at municipal elections (a) 
generally, 47 <fc 48 Vict. c. 70 (Municipal Elections and Corrupt and 
Illegal Practices Act, 1884), s. 30 : (b) in the City of London, Id. s. 35 ; at 
elections of guardians of the poor {id. s. 36) ; of county councils, 51 & 
52 Vict, c 41 s. 75 ; of district and parish councils, 56 & 57 Vict. c. 73, s. 
48, sub-s. 3 ; and of metropolitan borough councils, 62 & 63 Vict. c. 14. 
An indictment under 46 <fc 47 Vict. c. 51, which merely charged the 
defendant with "corrupt practices" at a parliamentary election, without 
setting out tho nature of such corrupt practices as " bribery " or " undue 
influence," was quashed on motion for want of certainty. R. v. Norton, 

16 Cox, 59, Pollock, B. But after verdict no objection for want of 
certainty can be taken to an indictment so framed, although tho majority 
of the judges were of opinion that if the objection hod been taken by way 
of motion to quash the indictment it must have prevailed. R. v. Stroulger, 

17 Q. B. D. 827 ; 55 L. J. (if. C.) 137. 

7. In an indictment for an offence under the Debtors Act, 1869 (32 & 33 
Vict. c. 62), as amended and extended by the Bankruptcy Acts of 1883 eft 
1890, it is sufficient to set forth the substance of the offence charged in the 
words of the Act, specifying the offence, or as near thereto as circumstances 
admit, without alleging or setting forth any debt, act of bankruptcy, 



70 Indictment. 

trading, adjudication, or any proceedings in, or order, warrant, or 
document of any conrt acting under the Bankruptcy Acts, 1883 &• 1890. 
See 32 & 33 Vict. c. 62, ». 19, and 46 & 47 Vict c. 52, *. 149, sttb-s. 2 ; 53 & 
54 Vict. c. 71, «. 26. Where an indictment under *. 13, wb-s. 1 of 32 & 33 
Vict. c. 62 (Debtors Act, 1869), alleged in the words of that sub-s. that 
the defendant " unlawfully in incurring a certain debt and liability to 

A. B., did obtain credit from tho said A. B. under false pretences," without 
stating the false pretences with which the defendant was charged, it was 
held tbat such indictment was good by virtue of «. 19 of that statute, and 
that no objection to it could be taken by motion to quash or otherwise. 
7?. v. Watkinson, 12 Cox, 271 (C. C. B.) : B. v. Pierce, 16 Cox, 213 (C. C. B.) ; 
56 L. J. (M. C.) 85, overruling B. v. Bell, 12 Cox, 37. 

Where the offence cannot be stated with complete certainty it is suffi- 
cient to state it with such certainty as it is capable of. Thus in the case 
of a conspiracy to defraud a person of goods, it is not necessary to describe 
the goods as in an indictment for stealing them ; and it has been held 
sufficient to describe them as " divers goods." Anon., 1 Chit. Bep. (K. B.) 
698. See of no B. v. QUI, 2 B. & Aid. 204 ; 20 B. B. 407 : B. v. Kenrick, 
5 Q. B. 49 : Taylor v. B. [1895] 1 Q. B. 25 ; 64 L. J. {M. C.) 11. In 
indictments for perjury and offences of the same nature, also, the certainty 
formerly required according to the rules above mentioned is now no 
longer necessary ; for under 14 <£ 15 Vict. c. 100, s. 20 (which re-enacts 
and extends similar provisions contained in 23 O. 2, c. 11), it is necessary 
only to state the substance of the offence, and by what court, or before 
whom the oath, etc., was taken, etc., without setting out the bill, answer, 
etc., or any part of any proceeding in law or equity, and without setting 
out the commission or authority of the court or person before whom the 
offonce was committed. See post, tit. " Perjury" 

If any fact or circumstance which is a necessary ingredient of the 
offence be omitted in the indictment, such omission vitiates the indict- 
ment, and the defendant may avail himself of the defect in statement by 
demurrer, motion in arrest of judgment, or writ of error. Thus, in an 
indictment for assaulting an officer in the execution of process, without 
showing that he was an officer of the court out of which the process issued ; 

B. v. Osmer, 5 East, 301 ; see B. v. Everett, 8 B. & C. 114 ; for con- 
temptuous or disrespectful words to a magistrate, without showing that 
tho magistrate was in the execution of his duty at the time ; B. v. Lea/e, 
Andr. 226 (Ir.); against a public officer for non-performance of a duty, 
without showing that ho was such an officer as was bound by law to 
perform that particular duty ; B. v. Uollond, 5 T. B. 607, 623 ; for obtain- 
ing money under false pretences (before the passing of 24 <fc 25 Vict. c. 96, 
s. 88) without showing whose money it was ; if. v. Norton, 8 C. <£ P. 196 : 
B. v. Martin, 8A.&E. 481 ; 7 L. J. (M. V.) 89 ; that he feloniously did lead 
away a horse, etc., without paying " take ; '• 2 Hale, 184 : in all the*o and 
tho like cases the indictment is bad, and the defect may be taken advan- 
tage of in tho manner above mentioned. See B. v. Cheere, 7 D. <£ B. 461 ; 
4 B. iSt C. 902 ; and cf. B. v. Wade. 1 B. & Ad. 861. In an indictment for 
neglecting to provide sufficient sustenance for a child of tender years, the 
omission to state expressly that the prisoner had the ability to provide 
does not hurt if the indictment avers that it was the duty of the prisoner 
to provide, and that he unlawfully neglected to provide, the ability to 
provide being implied, and therefore sufficiently averred, by the word 
neglect. B. v. Byland, L. B., 1 C. C. B. 99; 37 L. J. (M. C.) 10: 11 Cox. 
101. 

Particulars.]— There are certain decisions which indicate that where 



r 



Particulars: Immaterial Averments. "I 

an iudictincnt is in general terms the court, ins toad of exercising its (lis* 
oretionary power to quash the indictment, " may direct particulars to bo 
delivered to the accused of any matter alleged in the indictment, and 
may adjourn the trial for the purpose of such delivery." Under theso 
decisions orders have been made on the prosecution to furnish particulars 
in coses of barratry, nuisance, embezzlement, and conspiracy. It is 
sufficient to make a general charge of the offence in indictments for 
barratry and keeping a disorderly house ; T Anson v. Stuart, 1 T. B. 748, 
752; and perhaps for other nuisances ; see B.Y. Curwood, S A.db E. 815 
(gas works) ; It. v. Dovmshire, 3 A. <fc E. 816, cit. (obstructing highway). 
According to Hawkins (bk. 1, e. 81, s. 13), it was settled practice not to 
allow the prosecutor to try an indictment for barratry until he had given 
particulars. In an anonymous case, 1 Chit. (K. B.) 698, on a charge of 
conspiracy, the court seems to have considered barratry the only case in 
which particulars could be ordered. 

But in B. t. Hodgson [1823] 3 ft & P. 422, Vaughan, B., on an indict* 
ment for embezzlement under 7 <fc 8 G. 4, c. 29 (rep.), expressed an 
opinion that particulars ought to be given of the names of the persons 
from whom the embezzled sums were alleged to have been received (and 
see Carr. Suppf. (3rd ed.) 322). And in B. v. Booty man [1832] 5 ft ifc P. 
300, Littledale, J., made an order for particulars on a similar indictment. 
In R. t. Marquis of Dovmshire [1834] 4 A. & E. 698, Parke, J., on an 
indictment for obstruction on highway, ordered particulars of the situa- 
tion of tho ways alleged to have been obstructed ; and in B. v. Garwood 
[1835] 3 A. <fc /;. 816 ; 5 N. <fc M . 369, the Court of King's Bench without 
affidavit ordered particulars of the several acts of nuisance to be proved 
under an indictment for causing a public nuisance by the produce of gas 
works* 

And since the decision in B. v. Gill, 2 B. & Aid. 204 ; 20 B. B. 407, 
that an indictment for conspiracy may be framed in a general form, 
there have been numerous instances of orders for particulars. In B. v. 
Hamilton [1836] 7 ft <fc P. 448, Littledale, J., made an order for particu- 
lars on a general indictment for conspiracy, and adjourned the trial. Ho 
stated that the particulars should contain the same information as a 
special count, so as to give the accused the same information as if the 
count had been framed specially. 

In It. v. Bycroft [1852] 6 Cox, 77, Williams, J., made a similar order on a 
similar indictment, and said that it was a matter of right, although there 
had been a preliminary inquiry and committal for trial. In B. v. Boberts 
[1852] Bears. 30, 32, n., Crompton, J., granted a rule nisi for an order 
for particulars under general counts for conspiracy without an affidavit, 
and the general counts were in the end abandoned. And in B. v. StapyU 
ton [1857J 8 Vox, 69 ; 6 W. B. 60, the Court of Queen's Bench on an 
indictment for conspiracy held that the defendant was entitled as of right 
to particulars of the acts relied upon in support of a general count for 
conspiracy. In this case application for particulars under special counts 
was refused, there being no affidavit by the defendant ; but the court did 
not definitely decide whether, even on an affidavit, such particulars 
would be added a3 a special count. Under the present practice, whereby 
the evidence for the prosecution in almost every indictable cose appears 
either in the depositions or in the notice of further evidence given before 
the trial (see post, tit. " Evidence," s. 8), occasion seldom arises for making 
an order for particulars. 

Immaterial averments — surplusage.] — By 14 <C- 15 Vict. c. 100, s. 1 (ante, 
p. 52) no indictment is to be deemed insufficient for the want of any 



72 Indictment. 

averment unnecessary to be proved. In oilier words, every fact and 
circumstance laid in an indictment, which is not a necessary ingredient 
in the offence, may be rejected as surplusage, and need not be proved 
at the trial; R. v. Jones, 2 B. <fc Ad. 611; and defects in the manner 
of stating such matter, will not vitiate the indictment R. v. Walker, 
4 Co. Rep. 41 ; R. v. Long, 5 Co. Rep. 121 b. : R. v. Holt, 2 Leach, 593 : 
Att.-Gen. of New South Wales v. Macpherson, L. R. 3 P. C. 268. And 
see R. v. Jfowarth, 3 Stark. (N.P.) 29. When the indictment contains 
surplusage, but facts constituting a complete offence are sufficiently 
stated without such superfluous words, the indictment is not bad 
because such surplusage is erroneously stated. R. v. Parker, L. R., 1 
(J. C. R. 225; 39 L. J. (M. C.) 60, Cockburn, C.J.; cf R. v. Radley, 
1 Den. 450, 18 L. J. (M. C.) 154 : R. V. Godfrey, Dears. & B. 426 ; 27 
L. J. (M. C.) 151: R. v. Huntley Bell, 238; and see post, p. 78. The 
allegation usually inserted in an indictment for perjury, "that so the 
defendant did commit wilful and corrupt perjury," may be rejected as 
surplusage. Ryalls v. R. t 11 Q. B. 781. Upon an indictment containing 
these words, charging the defendant with perjury in making a false 
affidavit under the Bills of Sale Act it was held that the offence was 
not perjury (but see now 41 <fc 42 Vict. c. 31, s. 17), but that these 
words might bo rejected as surplusage, and that the indictment, even 
after disregarding them, sufficiently stated the common law mis- 
demeanor of taking a false oath, and that the defendant was rightlv 
convicted thereon. R. v. Hodgkiss, L. R. 1 C. C. R. 212 ; 39 L. J. 
{M. C.) 14. In an indictment a pains t a defendant who has claimed 
to be tried by a jury under s. 17 of the Summary Jurisdiction Act 
(42 <fc 43 Vict. c. 49) 1879, it is not necessary to aver that such claim has 
been made. R. v. Chambers, 65 L. J. (M. C.) 214 ; 18 Cox, 401 (C. C. R.y 

Amount of certainty necessary .]— Not only must all the facts and cir- 
cumstances which constitute the offence be stated, but they must be stated 
with such certainty and precision (a) that the defendant may bo enabled 
to judge whether they constitute an indictable offence or not, in order 
that he may demur or plead to the indictment accordingly — that ho 
may be enabled to determine the species of offence which they consti- 
tute, in order that he may prepare his defence accordingly — that he 
may be enabled to plead a conviction or acquittal upon this indictment, 
in bar of another prosecution for the same offence— and that there may 
be no doubt as to the judgment which should be given, if the defendant 
b3 convicted. Sec R. v. Home, 2 Cowp. 672 : 20 St. Tr. 651 : R. v. Rowtd, 
3 Q. B. 180 ; 11 L. J. (M. C.) 74 ; White v. R. t 13 Cox, 318 ; //•. Rep. 10 C. L. 
508 (C. C. R. Ir.) : Taylor v. R. [1895J 1 Q. B. 25; 61 L. J. (M. C.) 11. 

(a) Certainty to a certain intent in general, however, is all that is required. 
Co. L\tt. 303 a. ; R. v. Long, .5 Co. Rep. 121 a. Certainty is of three kinds : 
certainty to a certain intent in every particular, which is required only in pleas, etc., 
of estoppel and pleas in abatement; certainty to a common intent, which is required 
in ordinary pleas ; and certainty to a certain intent in general, which is required in 
declarations and indictments. The latter is a medium between the other two ; not so 
great a degree of certainty as the first, and a greater degree of certainty than the 
second. I shall endeavour further to define them. Where certainty to a certain intent 
in every particular is required, the court will presume the negative of everything the 
pleader has not expresslv affirmed, and the Affirmative of everything the pleader has 
not expressly negatived ; or, in the words of Lord Coke, the pleader must exclude 
every conclusion against him. Where certainty to a common intent only is required, 
the court will presume in favour of the pleader every proposition which by reasonable 
intendment is impliedly included in the pleading, though not expressed ; and where 
words are made use of, which admit of a natural sense, and also oil an artificial one, or 
one to be made out by argument or inference, the natiral sense shall prevail. Thus, 



Description of Offence: Certainty. 73 

Therefore in indictments for offences of a local nature, sach as burglary, 
anon, and stealing in the dwelling-house, etc., a local description of the 
house, etc., must be given, namely, the parish or place, and county in 
which it is situate (see ante, p. 67). In indictments for obtaining money 
by false pretences, the false pretences mast be specified. B. v. Mason, 2 
T. B. 581 ; 1 B. B. 545 : B. v. Munoz, 2 Str. 1127. In an indictment 
against a person for not serving the office of constable, the mode of 
election most be set out, to show that he was legally elected ; for if he 
were not legally elected, he cannot be guilty of a crime in not serving. 
B. t. Bar pur, 5 Mod. 96. An indictment for extortion must show what fee 
was due, or that nothing was payable, B. v. Lake, 3 Leon. 268, as well as 
the fee exacted; and an indictment for stopping up the King's highway 
must specify what part is alleged to have been obstructed. B. v. Wright 
[1831] 1 A. & E. 434 : B. v. Boberts, 4 Mod. 101 ; 1 Show. 389. Also, for 
the same reasons, an indictment is bad for uncertainty if it charges the 
defendant with one or other of two offences, in the disjunctive, as that he 
murdered, or caused to be murdered, forged or caused to be forged, 2 Hawk. 
c 25, «. 58 ; B. v. Stocker, 1 Salk. 342, 371 ; B. v. St ought on, 2 Str. 900 ; B. v. 
Flint, Cos. (K. B.) temp. Hardw. 370 ; B. v. Morley, 1 Y. <fc J. 221 ; 1 Chit. 
Or. Zr., 230: or if it charges him in two different characters, in the disjunctive, 
at quod A., existens servus sive deputatus, took, etc. Smith v. Mall, 2 Bolle 
Bep. 263 : or if it may apply to either of two different definite offences, and 
does not specify which. B. v. Marshall, 1 Mood. C. C. 158. But uncer- 
tainty or ambiguity in stating matter which may be rejected as surplusage 
does not vitiate the indictment. B. v. Parker, L. B. 1 C. C. B. 225 ; 39 
L. J, (M. C.) 60. The uncertainty of one count of an indictment cannot be 
aided by reference to the description of the offence in another count. B. 
v. Sarah Waters, 1 Den. 356 ; 18 L. J. (M. C.) 53, 11 Cox, 101. But after 
verdict, defective averments in a second count may be aided by reference 
to sufficient averments in the first count. B. v. Waverton, 2 Den. 310 ; 17 
Q. B. 562; 21 L. J. (ibf. C.) 7. 

The Court will construe the words of the pleading according to their 
ordinary and usual acceptation, and technical terms according to their 
technical meaning. And if the sense of a word is ambiguous in the 
ordinary acceptation of it, it should be construed according as the context 
and subject-matter require it to be, in order to render the whole con- 
sistent and sensible : thus the word " until " may be construed inclusive 
or exclusive of the day to which it is applied according to the context 
and subject-matter. B. v. Stevens, 5 East, 214. In ft. v. Bigg, 1 Str. 18 ; 
3 P. Wms. 419 ; 24 Eng. Bep. 1127, the defendant was indicted for erasing 
the indorsement of a bank-note, and it appeared that the words erased 
were on the face of the note, but the jury found that such was commonly 

If a plea state that the maiter and ftllows of a college were seised in fee, it shall In 
intended in right of the college ; Fulmertton v. Stetoard, Plowd., 102 ; if a man plead 
a feoffment, hrery shall be intended, because it would not otherwise be a feoffment ; 
Co. Lift. 303 6. ; or, if he plead an assignment of dower, it shall be intended by metes 
and bounds, for otherwise it would not be a legal assignment. Bro. Pleader, 145 ; 
Kadwalader v. Bryan, Cro. Car. 162. Common intent, however, is a rule of construc- 
tion only, and not of addition ; it cannot add to a sentence words which are not 
impliedly included in it ; and therefore, in trespass, if the defendant plead a release, 
without showing at what time it was made, the court cannot presume that it was made 
after the trespass, Plowd, 4ti a., nnless the particular trespass be specially mentioned 
in it. Certainty to a certain intent in general, being a medium between the two 
degrees of certainty above mentioned, may be inferred from what has just now been 
said respecting them ; and it should seem, therefore, that in cases where it is 
required, everything which the pleader should have stated, and which is not either 
expressly alleged or by necessary implication included in what is alleged, must be 
presumed against him. 



74 Indictment. 

called an indorsement; and a majority of tho judges held that the descrip- 
tion was correct. An indictment will not be vitiated by ungrammatical 
language, if the real meaning be sufficiently expressed, R. v. Stoke*, 1 
Den. 307; 2 C. <fe K. 536; 17 L. J. (M. C.) 116. In indictments against 
officers for neglect of duty or malversation in their offices, it is sufficient 
to allege that they were such officers at the time of the offence committed, 
without showing tho'r appointment; see R. v. Holland, 5 T. R. 607, 623: 
2 R. R. 678; for their regular appointment is presumed from their exer- 
cising the duties of their offices. Where it was stated that the justices of 
our lord the King were assigned by letters patent under " his seal of Great 
Britain," it was presumed to be the great seal, R. v. Yandell, 4 T. R. 521, 
for it could not be by any other. 

Matter of inducement.] — Mere matter of inducement does not require 
so much certainty as the statement of the gist of the offence. R. v. 
Wright, 1 Vent 169 ; Com. Dig. Indictment (G. 5). Thus, in an indict- 
ment for disobedience to an order of justices for payment of a church 
rate, made under 53 G. 3, c. 127, an averment, by way of inducement, 
that a rate was duly made as by law required, and afterwards duly 
allowed, and that the defendant was by it duly rated, was held sufficient, 
without setting out the facts which constituted the alleged due rating, etc., 
although in the statement of the offence itself it would not have been 
sufficient. R. v. Bidwell, 1 Den. 222 ; 17 L. J. (M. O.) 99 : R. v. Wade, 

1 B. cfc Ad. 861 : R. v. Soper, 3 B. A- C. 857 : R. v. Sainsbury, 4 T. R. 451 ; 

2 R. R. 433 : R. v. Westlcy, Bell, 193 ; 29 L. J. (M. C.) 35. So, an aver- 
ment in an indictment under 33 <fe 34 Vict. c. 90, s. 11, that u within tlfe 
limits of her Majesty's dominions and after tho coming into operation 
therein of the Act called the Foreign Enlistment Act, 1870/' certain 
offences against that Act were committed is a sufficient allegation that 
the Act was in operation in that part of bis Majesty's dominions in which 
the allegod offences were committed. R. v. Jameson [1896] 2 Q. B. 425 ; 
65 L. J. (M. C.) 218. 

Description tf writings.'] — At Common Law, written instruments, 
wherever they formed a part of the gist of tho offence charged (see R. v. 
Cotdson, 1 Dti\. 592; 19 L. J. (M. C.) 182), must be set out verbatim. 
Thus, in the case of forgery, the instrument forged must, before 2 <(* 3 
H r . 4, c. 123, s. 3 (rep.), have been set out in the indictment in words or 
figures; R. v. Mason, 1 East, 180, w.; 2 East, P. C. 975; R. v. Powell, 

1 Leach, 77: R. v. Jlart, Jd. 145: R. v. Lyon, 2 Leach, 597, 608; and on 
an indictment for not executing a warrant, tbo naturo and tenor of the 
warrant must have been shown. R. v. Burrovgh, 1 Vent. 305 ; Com. Dig. 
Indictment (G. 3). The rule above stated never applied to written instru- 
ments made the subject of larceny by statute. R. v. Johnson, 3 M. it* Sel. 
539 : 16 R. R. 352. But the indictment must follow some of the descrip- 
tions given in the statute. Thus, where an indictment upon 2 G. 2, c. 25, 
8. 8 (rep.), which applied to bank notes, bills of exchange and promissory 
notes, etc., described tho instrument stolen as " a certain note, commonly 
called a bank note," it was held insufficient. R. v. Craven, R. <t- R. 14 : 

2 East, P. C. 601. And where the indictment described the instrument 
stolen as " a bank post bill," but did not set out tho bill, the indictment 
was held bad, because it did not fall within any of the descriptions in 
that statute. R. v. Chard, R. & R. 488. The strictness of the common 
law rule has been relaxed by 14 <fc 15 Vict. c. 100, ss. 5, 7 (ante, p. 52), and 
ss. 42, 43 of the Forgery Act, 1861 (24 ifr 25 Vict. c. 98) . Under these enact- 
ments it is sufficient to describe an instrument referred to in an indictment 



Description of Writings. 75 

by any name or designation by which it is usually known without setting 
oat & copy or facsimile. Bat it is still necessary that the description 
should be such as to bring the instrument within the words of the enact- 
ment on which the indictment is framed. 

It was formerly essential where the written instrument or parts of it 

were set out verbatim to set them out correctly, but the Court can now 

under U& 15 Viet. c. 100, s. 1 (ante, p. 52), amend any variance between 

indictment and evidence in this respect if it considers the variance not 

material to the merits of the case, and that the amendment will not 

prejudice the defendant in his defence of the merits. 

If an indictment describes a written instrument as purporting to be so 
wd so, the instrument when produced in evidence must appear upon the 
face of it to be what it is described as purporting to be, otherwise the 
defendant may be acquitted for the variance, if not amended. As, 
for instance, if the instrument be described as a " certain paper writing 
purporting to be a bank-note," and the note produced, though made to 
resemble, vary materially in its form from a real bank-note. B. v. Jones, 

1 Dong. 330 \B. Y. Beading, 1 Fast, 180, n. ; 2 Leach, 590 : B. v. Edsall, 
Id. 662, n.(o). As to the meaning of the word "purporting," see B. v. 
Kti% Dean. 486 ; 24 L. J. (If. C.) 110 : B. v. Goldstein, B. & B. 473. 

Words spoken or tvritten.] — Where words, written or spoken, are tho 
gist of the offence, they must be set forth verbatim or with particularity 
in the indictment ; as, for instance, in an indictment for scandalous or 
contemptuous words spoken to a magistrate in the execution of his office ; 
R. v. Bagg, 1 Bolle Bep. 79 : B. t. How, 2 Str. 693 ; or, for defamatory libel. 
Zex&io v. Axtell, 6 T. B. 162 : B. v. Callanan, 6 B.&C. 102; Abbott, C. J. ; 
or for blasphemous or seditious words ; B. v. Popplewell, 2 Str. 686 : 
ft. v. Sparling, 1 Str. 497 ; or sending a threatening letter. B. v. Lloyd, 

2 Ea$t, P. C. 1122 : B. v. Ilunter, 2 Leach, 624, 631. And if there be any 
material variance between the words proved and those laid, even if laid 
as spoken in tho third person, and proved to have been spoken in the 
second, R. t. Berry, 4 T. R. 2 17 , the defendant will be acquitted, unless 
the judge think fit to amend the variance. Bnt if some of the words be 
proved as laid, and the words so proved amount to an indictable offence, 
it will be sufficient. And see post, tit. " Treason.' 9 

An indictment charging the publication of an obscene libel must for- 
merly have set out the words complained of. Bradlaugh v. B. t 8 Q. B. D. 
G07 (C. A.) : B. v. Bradlaugh, 48 L. J. (M. <?.) 5. The rule laid down in 
this ease has, however, now been set aside by 51 & 52 Vict. c. 64, s. 7* 
See post, tit. "Libel," where the section is fully set out. 

In indictments for perjury and like offences it is not necessary to set 
out in full the affidavit, answer, etc., on which perjury is assigned, and is 
sufficient to set out the substance of the offence charged. 14 <fe 15 Vict. 
r. 100, «. 20. In indictments for obtaining, etc., money by false pretences 
the words constituting the alleged false pretence should be set out in full ; 
**? ante, p. 73 ; post, tit* " False Pretences* 9 As to indictments for treason, 
sr« that title, post. 

Description of records.'] — Where any matter laid in an indictment is to 

he prorcd by a record, care must be taken that the statement corresponds 

exactly with the record. On this subject, and that of variances between 

written ana 

thereof upon 

affirm in proceeding* 

(arft, f. $5). 




76 Indictment. 

Desci'iption of personal chattels.] — Where personal chattels are the subject 
of an offence, as in larceny, they should be described specifically by their 
appropriate names, and the number of each species or particular kind of 
goods should be stated : see 2 Hale, 182, 183 : and formerly the value also, 
thus, for instance, " one coat [of the value of twenty shillings], two pairs of 
boots [of the value of thirty shillings], two sheets [of the value of thirteen 
shillings], of the goods and chattels of one J. &," or, "one sheep of the price 
of twenty shillings" etc., and the like. If, for instance, it were " twenty 
wethers and ewes" the indictment would be bad for uncertainty; it should 
state how many of each. 2 Hale, 183. Tho statement of value can now 
in most cases be safely omitted ; see post, p. 77. Goods may be described 
by the name by which they are known in trade ; as, for instance, a set of 
new handkerchiefs in the piece may be described as so many handkerchiefs, 
though they are not separated from each other, if the pattern designate 
each, and they are considered in trade as so many handkerchiefs. R. v. 
Nibbs, 1 Mood. C. C. 25. Ingots of tin, or a bar of iron may be described 
as so many pounds weight of tin or iron ; but where an article has obtained, 
in common parlance, a particular name of its own, it would be wrong to 
describe it by the name of the material of which it is composed. B. v. 
Mansfield, C. <ft Mar. 140. Under the present practice the main reason 
for enumerating all the goods, in cases where their value is not material, 
is to found on application for restitution on conviction of the thief. 

The prosecutor is bound (subject to the power of amendment given by 
14 & 15 Vict. c. 100, s. 1, ante, p. 52) by the description of the species of 
goods stated. Thus, an indictment for stealing a pair of shoes could not, 
before that statute, be supported by evidence of a larceny of a pair of 
boots. But a variance in the number of the articles is immaterial, pro- 
vided that the value of the goods proved to have been stolen be sufficient 
to constitute the offence at law, that is to say, since the abolition of the 
distinction between grand and petty larceny in 1827, provided that such 
goods are of some value, though not necessarily of the value of the smallest 
coin known to the law. R. v. Morris, 9 0. <fc P. 349. So, if there be ten 
different species of goods enumerated, and the prosecutor prove a larceny 
of any one or more of a sufficient value, it will be sufficient, although he 
fail in his proof of the rest. 

Description of animals.]— An indictment for a larceny of live animals 
need not state them to be alive, because the law will presume them to be 
so, unless tho contrary be stated ; but if, when stolen, the animals were 
dead, that fact should bo stated ; for, as the law would otherwise presumo 
them to be alive, the variance would be fatal (unless amended). R. v. 
Edwards, R. & R. 497 : If. v. IMloway, IC.&P. 128. See R. v. Williams, 
1 Mood. C. C. 107. But if an animal have the same appellation whether it 
be alive or dead, and it makes no difference as to the chargo whether it 
were alive or dead, it may be called, when dead, by the appellation 
applicable to it when alive. R. v. Puckering, 1 Mood. C. C. 242. An 
indictment for stealing chattels which are the subject of larceny only in 
particular cases or under certain circumstances, must show that they 
fall within the requisite description. Thus an indictment for stealing 
" three eggs " was ruled to be bad, because only tho eggs of animals 
domitce natures are the subject of larceny. R. v. Cox. 1 C. & K. 494 ; but 
see R. v. Qallears, 1 Den. 501 ; 19 L. J. (M. C.) 13. An indictment for 
stealing " fowls " ought to describe them as " tame " or " domestic ; " and 
it was formerly doubted, whether the omission of such a description is 
the subject of amendment. R. v. Lonsdale, 4 F. & F. 56. But an indict- 
ment for bestiality, which described tho animal as a " certain bitch/' was 



Statement of Value, etc. 77 

held sufficiently certain, although the females of foxes and some other 
animate, as well as of dogs, are so called. B. v. Alien, 1 C.& K. 495. As 
to what animals are the subject of larcency, see post, tit. " Larceny." 

Value.}— It is unnecessary to state value, except where it is of the essence 
of the offence (14 <fc 15 Vict. c. 100, s. 24, ante, p. 54), such as an offence 
against the Larceny Act, 1861, «. 60, or the Debtors Act, 1869, s. 11, subs. 4. 
Where value is essential to constitute the offence, and the value is ascribed 
in the indictment to many articles collectively, the offence must be made 
oat is to all or a sufficient number of the articles, for the grand jury have 
ascribed the value to all the articles collectively. B. v. Forsyth. B. <t- B. 
274, 

Money.']— Until 1851, money was described in an indictment as so many 
"pieces of the current gold, or " silver," or " copper coin of the realm, 

called ," and the particular species of coin must have been specified. 

See R. v. Fry, B. <fc B. 482 : B. v. Warshaner, 1 Mood. C. C. 466 : B. v. 
Badley, 1 Den. 450 ; 18 L. J. (M. C.) 154. And if a larceny of particular 
pieces of coin, as sovereigns, half-sovereigns, crowns, etc., was charged, 
the indictment was not supported by proof of the stealing of a sum of 
money, which must have consisted of some or other of the coins mentioned 
in the indictment, without proof of the stealing of some one or more of 
the specific coins named. J?, v. Bond, 1 Den. 517 ; L. J. (M. C.) 138. Since 
1851 (14 <£ 15 Vict. c. 100, s. 18, ante, p. 54), it has been sufficient to describe 
coin or bank-notes as " money " without specifying any particular coin or 
bank-note. 

Notes of a provincial bank, which were not at the time of the commis* 
rion of the offence in circulation for value, but which were paid in at ono 
branch of the bank, and were in courso of transmission to another branch, 
at which they had originally been issued, in order that they might there 
be re-issued or otherwise disposed of— it not being the practice of the 
bank to re-issue at one branch notes originally issued at another — were 
held to be bank-notes within 14 cfc 15 Vict, c 100, s. 18. B. v. West, Dears. 
A B. 109 ; 26 L. J. {M. C.) 6. Where an indictment charged a prisoner 
with stealing ''nineteen shillings in money of the moneys of A. £.," and 
the evidence is that the prisoner stole a sovereign in gold, it was held that 
he cannot be convicted of stealing nineteen shillings : B. v. Bird, 42 L. J. 
[M. C.) 44 ; but in such a case the court before which the indictment is 
being tried may order the indictment to be amended under 14 & 15 Vict. 
c 100, a. 1 (ante, p. 52) by striking out 4I nineteen shillings, M and inserting 
"money," which by s. 18 of the same statute is a sufficient description of 
the thing stolen, and the prisoner may be convicted upon the indictment 
as so amended. B. v. Gumble, L. B. 9 2, C. C. B. 1. In the report of B. 
v. Gumble, 42 L. J. (M. C.) 7, the amendment made, or rather 'suggested, 
for it appears from both reports that it was taken as made and not actually 
made, was the substitution of " one sovereign " for " nineteen shillings 
and sixpence." Either amendment would, however, have been within the 
power of the court, and either would have have been effectual ; the one 
mentioned in the Law Beports, as furnishing a sufficient description of 
the things stolen, within s. 18 of 14 & 15 Vict. c. 100, and that mentioned 
in the Law Journal, as accurately describing the actual coin stolen. 

Word* of art.}— In an indictment for murder, the words " did murder " 
(murdrarit), Dy. 261 a ; in an indictment for rape the words " did ravish " 
(mpntf), Stavndf. 26 a ; and in an indictment for larceny the words 
"feloniously did take and carry away " (felonice cepit et asportauit), 4 Bl. 
Qm. 305, are absolutely necessary ; they are technical words, essential to 



78 Indictment. 

the definition of the offence, without which these offences respectively 
cannot be described upon the record : and if omitted, the defendant may 
demur, move in arrest of judgment, or bring a writ of error. An indict- 
ment for any offence is not now held insufficient for the omission of the 
words " as appears upon the record," or of the words " with force and arms " 
(formerly inserted in many indictments). 14 & 15 Vict, c. 100, *. 21 (ante, 
p. 54). Sec 1 Chit. Cr. L. 240 ; 1 Step., Hist. C. L. 286. 

Statement of intent.]— Tho intention of the party at the time he com- 
mitted the offence is often a necessary ingredient in it ; and in such cases 
it is necessary to state the intention in the indictment (ante, pp. 11, 33) as 
one of the facts and circumstances which constitute the offence. See B. v. 
Philipps, 6 East, 464. (See post, Part II. ch. *.) In some cases the law 
has adopted certain technical expressions to indicate the intention with 
which an offence is committed ; and in such cases the intention most bo 
expressed by the technical word prescribed, and no other. Thus, treason 
must be laid to hare been done " traitorously ; " all felonies, whether at 
common law or created by statute (B. v. Gray, L. <fc C. 365 ; 33 L. J. (Af. (7.) 
78; B. v. Martin, 6 St. Tr., N. S. 925, 1093), to have been dono 
"feloniously;" burglary is laid to have been done "feloniously and 
burglariously " and with intent to commit a felony ; murder, "feloniously 
and of his malice aforethought ; " 2 Hale, 184, 187; forgery, "feloniously" 
if made felony by statute, and " with intent to defraud" etc. All mis- 
demeanors should be laid to have been done unlawfully even where that 
word does not occur in the definition of the offence. 

Where a statute annexes a higher degree of punishment to a common- 
law felony, if committed under particular circumstances, an indictment 
for the offence, in order to subject the defendant to that higher degree of 
punishment, must expressly charge it to have been committed under 
those circumstances, and must state the circumstances with certainty and 
precision. 2 Hale, 170. But see 7 O. 4, c. 64, s. 21 (ante, p. 51). 

Statutory offences.] — Lastly, as to indictments for offences created by 
statute. The statute contains a definition of the offence ; and the offence 
consists of the commission or omission of certain acts by certain persons 
under certain circumstances, and in some cases with a particular intent. 
As to the construction of expressions relating to number, gender, or person 
in statutes, see ante, p. 11. An indictment for an offence against a statute, 
must with certainty and precision charge the defendant to have committed 
or omitted the acts, under the circumstances and with the intent men- 
tioned in the statute ; and if any one of these ingredients in the offence be 
omitted, the defendant may move to quash the indictment, demur, move 
in arrest #f judgment, or bring a writ of error. The defect will not be 
aided by verdict : see Lee v. Clarke, 2 East, 833, nor will the conclusion 
contra for mam statuti cure it. 2 Hale, 170 : B. v. Jukes, 8 T. B. 542 ; 5 
B. B. 455 : Com. Dig. Information (D. 3). 

Aider by verdict^ — But u where the offence charged has been created 
by any statute or subjected to a greater degree of punishment or 
excluded from the benefit of clergy by any statute the indictment 
or information shall after verdict be held sufficient to warrant the 
punishment prescribed by the statute if it describe the offence in the 
words of the statute." 7 G. 4, c. 64y s. 21 {ante, p. 51), as to the effect of 
the sub-s. B. v. Martin, 8 A. d\ E. 481. 

It is, however, necessary to aver such facts and circumstances as are 
necessary to bring the case within the operation of the statute upon which 



Statement of Statutory Offences. 70 

Ihc indictment is founded. See B. v. Warshaner, 1 Mood. C. C. 466; 

Hamilton v. Beg., 9 Q. B. 271 ; Douglas v. B., 13 Q. B. 74 : if. v. Bowen, 

13Q.5.790: 5. v. Bovdands, 2 />«». 364; 17 Q. B. 671; 21 Z,. J. (M. C.) 

81; 3T«fc v. R^± B.& S. 935 ; 33 L. J. (M. C.) 94 ; B. v. Goldsmith, L. 

JL1C.C. B. 74 ; 42 L. J. (AT. C.) 94: Heymann v. i?., Z,. B. 8 & -0. 102 : 

Taylor t. A. [18953 2 Q. I*. 25. In an indictment upon 5 Eliz. c. 11, s. 2 

(rep.) (which, made it bigb treason to clip, round or file any of the coin of 

tie realm, " for wicked lucre or gain's sake,*) it was necessary to charge 

the offence to hare been committed for the sake of wicked lucre or gain, 

otherwise it would be bad. 1 Hale, 220. So an indictment on that port 

of the Black Act (rep.) which made it felony " wilfully and maliciously " 

to shoot at any person in a dwelling-house or other place, was held bad, 

hecause it charged the offence to have been done "unlawfully and 

•loteumsly;' omitting the word " wilfully ; " B. v. Davis, 1 Leach, 493 ; 

some of the judges, indeed, thought that "maliciously" included 

a wflrolly ;* but the majority held, that as " wilfully » and " maliciously " 

were both mentioned in the statute as descriptive of the offence, both 

must be stated in the indictment. See also B. v. Bent, 1 Den. 157; 

2 C. & K. 179 ; but see B. v. Harvey, L. B. 1 C. C. B. 284; 40 L. J. 

(3f. C.) 63. So an indictment upon 7 & 8 G. 4 c 30, s. 2 (rep.), for 

feloniously, voluntarily, and maliciously setting fire to a barn, was 

held bad, because the words of the statute are "unlawfully and 

maliciously." B. v. Turner, 1 Mood. C. C. 239. So an indictment upon 

9 G. 4, c 31, s. 12 (rep.), charging the prisoner with *' feloniously, 

wilf ally, and maliciously cutting," etc., was not sufficient, the words of 

the statute being " unlawfully and maliciously." B. v. Byan, 2 Mood. 

C. C. 15; B. v. Cook, 2 East, P. C. 616; 1 Leach, 105. See also B. v. 

Douglass, 1 Camp. 212. Where a word not in the statute is substituted 

in the indictment for one that is, and the word thus substituted 

ia equivalent to the word used in the statute, or is of more extensive 

signification than it, and includes it, the indictment will be sufficient. 

As, for instance, if the word "knowingly" be in the statute, and the 

word *' advisedly " be substituted for it in the indictment. R. v. Fuller, 

1 B. & P. 180 ; 2 Leach, 790, or the word " wilfully " in the statute, and 

" maliciously " in the indictment (the words " advisedly " and " maliciously " 

not being in the statutes respectively), the indictment would be sufficient. 

An indictment framed upon 24 & 25 Vict. c. 100, «. 18, which enacts that 

whosoever shall unlawfully and maliciously by any means " cause " any 

grievous bodily harm to any person, shall be guilty of felony, was held 

sufficient though the word " cause " was used instead of " inflict." B. v. 

Bray, 15 Cox, 197 (C. C. B.). It is much belter, however, to follow 

strictly the words of the statute, as it precludes all question about the 

meaning of the expressions used. And it is sufficient to follow the words 

erf the statute or describe the offence unless indeed they are generic 

terms, in which case it is necessary to state the species, according to the 

truth of the case. Thus, in an indictment on tbe Incitement to Mutiny 

Act, 1797 (37 G. 3, c 70), which makes it felony to endeavour to seduce 

a soldier or sailor from his duty, it is sufficient to charge an endeavour, 

etc., without specifying the means employed. B. v. Fuller, ubi sup. But 

where a statute (for instance) makes the maliciously killing of cattle a 

felony, it is not sufficient in an indictment on the statute to charge the 

defendant with killing "cattle" generally, but the species of cattle, 

as horse, mare, gelding, cow, ox, heifer, etc., must be stated. B. v. 

fha/Jkley, B. <fc B. 2oS. And where the subject of the indictment cannot 

be brought within the meaning of the statute without the aid of extrinsic 

efidence it is necessary, besides charging the offence in the words of the 



80 Indictment. 

statute, to aver such facts and circumstances as may be necessary to 
bring the matter within the meaning of it ; as, for instance, where by the 
usage of a pnblio office, the bare signature of a party upon a navy bill 
operates as a receipt, an indictment for forging such a receipt, setting 
forth the navy bill and indorsement, and charging the defendant with 
haying forged "a certain receipt for money; to wit, the sura of 257. 
mentioned and contained in the said paper upon a navy bill, which 
forged receipt was as follows; that is to say, — William Thornton, 
William Hunter* 9 was held bad, because it did not show, by proper 
averments that these signatures imported a receipt R. v. Hunter^ 
2 Leach, 624 ; 2 East, P. C. 928. See R. v. Barton, 1 Mood. C. C. 141 : R. 
v. Thompson, 2 Leach, 910 : R. v. Board man, 2 M . <fc Rob. 147, 

Exceptions and provisoes."] — Bale (1 Hist. P. C. 170, 171) says that in 
certain cases the indictment need not mention nor qualify a statutory 
offence so as to exempt it out of provisoes ; and the defence may take 
the benefit of the provisoes under "not guilty." The general rule is 
stated in Thibault v. Gibson, 12 M. <fc W. 88, 94, by Lord Abinger, C.B., in 
the following terms : — 

"In all cases where proceedings are taken against a party for the 
recovery of a penalty under a statute, if there be any exception in the 
clause which gives the penalty exempting certain cases from its opera- 
tion, the declaration or information must show that the particular case 
is not within the exception. But where it comes by way of proviso in a 
subsequent part of the Act, it is not necessary to notice it in the declara- 
tion or information, but it is matter which the defendant must allege as 
ground for defence." 

For other authorities to the like effect, see Spieres v. Parker, 1 T. R. 141 ; 
1 R. R. 165 : R. v. Earnshaw, 15 East, 456 : R. v. Jarvis, 1 East, 6*3, n* t 
646, n. : R. v. Pratten, 6 T. R. 559 : 7?. v. Baxter, 5 T. R. 83 ; 2 Leach, 
578; 2 East, P. C. 781 : R. v. Matters, 1 B. A Aid. 362 : R. v. Pearoe, 
R. & R. 174 : R. y. Robinson, Id. 321 : R. v. Palmer, 1 Leach, 102 : Simp- 
son v. Ready, 12 M. & W. 736, 740. In R. v. James [1902] 1 K. B. 540 
(C. C. R.) the effect of the authorities on this subject was held to be that 
it is not necessary for the prosecution to negative a proviso, even though 
the proviso be continued in the same section of the Act of Parliament 
creating the offence, unless the proviso is in the nature of an exception 
which is incorporated directly or by reference with the enacting clause. 
See R. v. Hall, 1 T. R. 320 : Steel v. Smith, 1 B. <fc Aid. 94. Where a 
statute makes the doing of an act " without lawful authority or excuse " 
criminal, it is sufficient if the indictment negatives " lawful excuse " 
without also negativing "lawful authority," as there can be no "lawful 
authority " which would not also be a " lawful excuse," and therefore to 
negative "lawfnl excuse" is also to negative "lawful authority." R. v. 
Harvey, L. R. 1 C. C. R. 284 ; 40 L. J. (M. C.) 63. 

Citing statutes.] — It is not necessary in an indiotment to cite or recite 
any statute. As to the mode proper at common law of stating the title, 
etc., of a statute in pleading, see R. v. Biers, 1 A.&E. 327 : Oibbs v. Pike, 
8 M. & W. 223 : Beck v. Beverley, 11 M . & W. 845 : R. v. Westley, BeU m 
193 ; 29 L. J. ( ifcf. C.) 35. 

It was to avoid risk of errors of statement that the conclusion " against 
the form of the statute "or "statutes," etc., was introduced. Palgrave 
v. Windham [1718] 1 Sir. 214. But that conclusion is now unnecessary. 
See 14 & 15 Vict. c. 100, *. 24, ante, pp. 54, 55. 

By the Inter^etation Act, 1889 (52 <fc 53 Vict. c. 63), s. 85 (1) in any 



Figure* in Indictment. 81 

Act, instrument or document, an Act may be cited (a) by reference to the 
short title, if any, of the Act, either with or without a reference to the 
chapter, or (&) by reference to the regnal year in which the Act was 
passed, and where there are more statutes or sessions than one in the 
same regnal year, by reference to the statute or the session as the case 
may require, and where there are more chapters than one by reference to 
the chapter, and any enactment may be cited by reference to the section 
or sub-section of the Act in which the enactment was contained.** Most 
of the Acts still in force referred to in this work hare been given short 
titles either by the Short Titles Act, 1896 (59 <fc 60 Vict, c. 14), or by other 
enactments. 

Figures in indictment.] — No part of the indictment should be in figures ; 
and therefore numbers, dates, etc., Bhould be stated in words at length. 
2 Hale, 170. In the old books on Crown practice it is generally stated 
that numbers in an indictment must be expressed in words. Burn's 
Justice (17th ed.), published in 1793, states the rule thus {vol u. p. 693) : 
" Figures to express numbers are not allowable in an indictment, but 
numbers must be expressed in words (2 Hale, 170 ; Or. Circ. Comp. 109 ; B. 
t. Haddock, Andr. 137), or at least in Roman numerals (B. v. Philips, 1 Str. • 
261)." 4 Q. 2, c 26 (rep.), whioh abolished Latin indictments, directed 
that indictments, etc, should be written in such legible hand and character 
as the Acts of Parliament are usually engrossed in, and the lines and 
words of the same to be written at least as close as the said Acts usually 
are, and not in any hand commonly called court hand, and in words at 
length and not abbreviated. 6 G. 2, c. 14, a. 5 (rep.), permitted indictments, 
etc., to be " written or printed in a common legible hand or character, 
and with the like way of writing or printing, and with the like manner of 
expressing numbers by figures as have heretofore or are now commonly 
used in the said courts respectively, and with such abbreviations as are 
now commonly used in the English language." In Bex v. Haddock, ubi 
sup., the objection was taken that in an indictment the year of our Lord 
and certain quantities of bricks were expressed in common figures. 
Counsel for the objection cited 2 Male, 170 ; 1 Sid. 4.0; 1 Keb. 19 ; and 
Style, 88. Chief Justice Lee, at p. 146, held as to this objection : " There 
is great weight in it from the authority of the cases which have been 
cited in support thereof. There is no distinction as to this point between 
indictments capital or criminal, but the only difference between them is 
the consideration of the punishment ; and therefore the passage cited out 
of Lord Hale's history is very material, and he is therein very express 
that figures ought not to be used in indictments. The cases in Style, 
88; 1 Sid. 40; 1 Keb. 19, have been also cited. The case cited contra, 
1 Vent. 256, doth not clash with the opinion contra of Lord Hale, because 
that is the case of a venue in a civil action. Nor is tho other of Bex v. 
Teomans strong enough to encounter his opinion, wherein he is so very 
express, and treats professedly of the subject, for there the figures were 
not Roman, so that the matter dfd not come in question." In B. v. 
Teomans (Pasch., 11 Will. 3), referred to in Andrews, p. 141, a caption 
had been held bad for having the date in common English figures — 1697 
•—but it was held that if Roman had been used it would have been well. 
This accords with B. v. Philips, 1 Str. 261. The only exception to this 
is, where & facsimile of a written instrument is set out, as was formerly 
necessary, and as is still done in certain cases in an indictment for forgery 
at common law (see post, tit. " Forgery "), in which case it must be set oat in 
the indictment in words and figures, as in the original itself. B. v. Mason, 
1 East, 180, n. Both the statutes discussed in Haddock's case were 
JUCJ-. 6 






82 Indictment, 

repealed in 1879 by 42 & 43 Vict, c 59. The preamble of the Act 
describes the Acts to be repealed as relating to civil procedure or matters 
connected therewith, and describes them as spent or ceasing to be in 
force otherwise than by specific and express repeal by Parliament, or as 
by lapse of time and change of circumstances become unnecessary. But 
the form of the saving clause is calculated to create doubts as to the 
exact effect of the repeal. 

But the use of figures for words is now not unusual, and seems at most 
to be merely a formal defect, amendable under 14 & 15 Vict. c. 100, «. 25 
(ante, p. 55). Lawrance, J., so held in B. v. Price, 17 T. L. B. 80 ; 85 
L. J. Newsp. 647 ; 41 Sol. J. 71. In B. y. Edwards, Cumberland Summer 
Assizes, July, 1901, Bidley, J., ruled to the same effect. He consented to 
state a case on the point, but it seems never to have been stated. 

Duplicity.]— The indictment must not be double ; that is. to say, no one 
count of the indictment should charge the defendant with having com- 
mitted two or more offences : for instance, with having committed a 
murder and a robbery, or the like. So, two defendants cannot be jointly 
charged with murder or manslaughter by means of an injury done by one 
of them to the deceased on one day and another injury done by the other 
of them on a different day. B. y. Devett, 8 CAP. 639. But where the 
offence charged, whether felony or misdemeanor, is one single act it may 
be made the subject of a single count. For instance, where the prisoner 
was charged in one count with uttering a number of forged receipts, and 
it was proved that all the forged receipts were uttered at one and the 
same time, in one bundle, the count was held good. B. v. Thomas, 2 East, 
P. C. 934. So, the indictment may charge the prisoner, in the same 
count, with felonious aots with respect to several persons— as in robbery, 
with having assaulted A. and B., and stolen from A. one shilling, and 
from B. two shillings—if it was all one transaction. B. v. Oiddins, C. <fe 
Mar. 634. A man may be indicted for the battery of two or more persons 
in the same count where the battery is one transaction, or for a libel upon 
two or more persons when the publication is one single act, without 
rendering the count bad for duplicity. B. y. Benfield, 2 Burr. 980, 983, 
984 : where B. v. Clendon, 2 Str. 870; 2 Ld. Baym. 1572, was held not 
law : and see B. v. Jenour, 7 Mod. 400. A count charging a man with 
one endeavour to procure the commission of two offences, is not bad for 
duplicity, because the endeavour is the offence charged. B. y. FuUer, 
1 U. <fc P. 180 ; 2 Leach, 790. 

An exception to the rule as to duplicity is to be found in indictments for 
burglary, in which it is usual and proper to charge the defendant with 
having broken and entered the house with intent to commit a felony, and 
also with having committed the felony intended. Laying several overt 
acts in a count for high treason is not duplicity, Kelyng, (J)., 8, because the 
charge consists of the compassing, etc., and the overt acts are merely 
ovidence of it ; and the same as to conspiracy. That the defendant 
published and caused to be published a libel is not double, for they are 
the same offence. B. v. Bradlaugh, 15 Cox, 217. 

An indictment under 11 G. 4 <fe 1 W. 4, c. 66, s. 20 (rep.), which charged 
"destroying, defacing, and injuring" a register, is not bad for duplicity, 
the destruction, etc., being all one act. B. y. Bowen, 1 Den. 22 ; 1 C.& K. 
501. And it is the practioe to charge in indictments for libel that the 
defendant " did publish and cause to be published ; " and in indictments 
under 38 & 39 Vict. c. 24, " did make and concur in making a false entry/* 
An indictment under s. 7 of 88 <fe 89 Vict. c. 86, charging that the 
defendant "used violence to or intimidated" has been held bad for 



Statements must not be Repugnant. 83 

duplicity. R. v. Edmondes, 59 J. P. 776, Lawrance, J. : and semble it was 
also bad for uncertainty, ante, p. 72. 

In criminal cases, the mode of objecting to duplicity is the same as in 
civil proceedings prior to the Common Law Procedure Act, 15 & 16 Vict. 
c. 76; i^,by special demurrer, perhaps also by general demurrer : or the 
court on motion may quash the indictment, which is now the usual 
procedure ; but it seems that duplicity cannot bo made the subject of a 
motion in arrest of judgment or of a writ of error ; Nash v. R., 4 B. <fc S. 
935; 33 L. J. (M. C.) 94 ; and it is cured by a verdict of guilty as to one 
of the offences, and not guilty as to the other. Duplicity is distinct from 
the joinder in one indictment of counts for different offences, as to 
which see post, p. 88. 

Statements must be positive.'] — Every fact and circumstance stated in an 
indictment mnst be laid positively : that is, the indictment must directly 
affirm that the defendant did so and so, or that such a fact happened 
under such and such circumstances : it cannot be stated by way of recital, 
" that whereas," etc., or the like. 2 Hawk. c. 25, s. 60 : R. Y. Whitehead, 1 
Sail: 371 : R. v. Growhurst,2 Ld. Raym. 1363 : R. v. Aikman, 1 Sess. Cos. 
159. Where an indictment for not obeying a justice's order set forth the 
order by way of recital, " that whereas a certain order" etc., although it 
charged the not obeying of the order positively, it was held bad. R. v. 
Crowhurst, 2 Ld. Raym. 1363. So, stating a matter by way of argument 
or inference would render the indictment bad ; as, for instance, that by a 
certain indenture testatum existit that J. S. demised, etc. ; and this, 
perhaps, even in mere matter of inducement, although in one case the 
contrary certainly has been decided. R. v. Goddard, 3 Salk. 171 : 2 Ld. 
Raym. 920. 

The reason for this rule is that the indictment is in form a finding of 
facts by the grand jury. See R. v. Pewtress, 2 Str. 1026. 

A defect in these respects is not cured by verdict ; and consequently 
the defendant may take advantage of it by demurrer, motion in arrest of 
judgment, or writ of error. 

Statements must not be repugnant'] — Where one material part of an 
indictment is repugnant to another, the whole is void : as, for instance, 
an indictment charging the defendant with forging a bond by which J. S. 
was bound, etc. (which is impossible if the writing be forged) ; or with 
disseissing A., and it appears upon the face of the indictment that A. had 
but an estate for years ; 2 Hawk. e. 25, 0. 62 ; with stealing the goods of 
the saifl J. S. where the name of J. S. was not previously mentioned ; 
Id. s. 72 ; or in the parish aforesaid, where no parish was before mentioned ; 
for forging a bill of exchange, stating it to be signed by the party whose 
signature was alleged to be forged ; R. v. Carter, 2 East, P. C. 985 ; or the 
tike. If the repugnancy bo in an immaterial part, it may in general be 
rejected as surplusage, especially after verdict. Bac. Abr., Pleas (14) : and 
see ante, p. 71, immaterial averments. Thus, upon an indictment, tempore 
1 G.4, for stealing a mare in the fourth year of the reign of G. 4, against 
the peace of our lord the now King, the words " fourth year of the " were 
rejected as surplusage. R. v. Gill, R. & R. 431. But still it is a general 
rule, that an allegation in pleading, which is sensible and consistent in 
the place where it occurred, and not repugnant to antecedent matter, 
cannot be rejected as surplusage, though laid under a videlicet, however 
inconsistent it may be with an allegation subsequent. R. v. Stevens, 5 
East, 244. One count of an indictment charged A. with stealing a 
promissory note from B. ; a second with stealing a bank-note from B. ; 



84 Indictment, 

and a third, with receiving goods " so as aforesaid feloniously stolen.*' It 
was held, after verdict, that the indictment was not objectionable on the 
ground of repugnancy ; for, first, the words of reference in the third 
count did not necessarily import a stealing of the goods by A. ; and, 
secondly, if they did the count was conceivably capable of proof. B. v. 
Craddock, 2 Den. 31 ; 20 L. J. (if. C.) 31. 

Averments, how made.] — The usual way of making an averment in an 
indictment is thus : " And the jurors aforesaid, upon their oath aforesaid, 
do further present that" etc. ; or if it is connected with what has imme- 
diately preceded it, it may be introduced simply thus : " And that," etc., 
then proceeding to state the matter of the averment. But when the 
matter of the averment is but a mere adjunct of some person or thing 
preceding, it does not require even this technical mode of introducing it ; 
thus, " that A. being an officer,' 1 etc., is a sufficient averment that A. was 
an officer ; see 2 Hawk. c. 25, s. 112 : B. v. Johnson, 2 JRolle Rep. 225 : i?. 
t. Boyall, 2 Burr. 832 : B. v. Bootie, Id. 864 : B.y. Higginson, Id. 1232 : 
B. v. Somerton, 1 B. & C. 463 ; " that A., knowing that B. was indicted 
for forgery, concealed a witness against him/' is a sufficient averment 
that B. was indicted. Fitzg. 122, 263. " So is " dans plagam mortalem," 
R. v. Long, 5 Co. Bep. 121 b ; March, pi. 137, or u sciens that," etc, B. v. 
Lawley, 2 Str. 904, is a good averment. And, where an indictment for 

Serjury stated that "at and upon the bearing of the said complaint, 1 ' tbe 
efendant deposed, etc., this was held a sufficient averment that the 
complaint was heard. B. v. Aylett, 1 T. B. 63, 70 : 1 B. B. 152. Tbe 
ability of a person to perform an act is sufficiently implied in and averred 
by an averment that he unlawfully neglected to do that act B. v. Byland, 
L. B. 1 C. C. B. 99 ; 37 L. J. (Af. C.) 10. 

Consequences of defective statement.'] — Defective statements in an indict- 
ment fall into three classes : 1. Defects which are incurable and fatal to 
the indictment. 2. Defects which are aided or cured by verdict 3. 
Defects which may be cured by amendment before verdict. 

1. Incurable defects.— It all the ingredients of the offence (whether it 
be an offence at common law or one created by statute) are not set forth 
in the indictment, or if any of them aro not stated with sufficient cer- 
tainty, the defendant may move to quash the indictment, or may demur, 
or may move in arrest of judgment, or bring a writ of error. Heymann v. 
B., L. B. t 8 Q. B. 102: B. v. Goldsmith, L. B., 2 C. C. J?. 74; 42 L. J. 
(M. C.) 94. 

2. Defects aided by verdict.— In offences created by statute, or subjected 
to a greater degree of punishment by any statute (although the defendant 
may demur, if the indictment does not describe the offence with sufficient 
certainty), he cannot, if it describe the offence in the words of the statute, 
move in arrest of judgment, or bring a writ of error ; for, after verdict, 
the indictment will, in that case, be sufficient to warrant the punishment. 
7 G. 4, c. 64, a. 21 (ante, p. 51). A count of an indictment, under sect 221 
of the Bankruptcy Act, 1861 (rep.), charged that the defendant was 
adjudged bankrupt in the London District Court of Bankruptcy, and 
that, upon his examination in the said court, with intent to defraud and 
defeat the rights of his creditors, he did not fully and truly discover to 
the best of his knowledge and belief all his property, to wit, all his per- 
sonal property in money and goods. The defendant having been found 
guilty, upon error brought, it was contended that the count was bad for 
uncertainty in not setting out the number and value, or even the kind of 
goods referred to in it ; but it was held that any want of certainty which 



Conclusion of the Indictment. 85 

existed was cured after verdict by 7 G. 4, c. 64, a. 61. Nash v. R.,± B & 
S. 935 ; 33 L. J. (M. C.) 94. 

There was no distinction at common law between the rules of pleading 
in civil and criminal cases. Heymann v. B., L. B., 8 Q. B. 102 ; 12 Cox, 
383: Castro v. J?., 6 ^ipp. Ccw. 229, 243: 5. v. Munslow [1895] 1 Q. J?. 
7o8;64i. J. (M. O.) 138 (C. C. i?.). And, independently of 7 & 4, c. 64, 
t.21 (ante, p. 51), it is a general rale of pleading at common law, that 
where an averment which is necessary for the support of the pleading is 
imperfectly staled, and the verdict on an issue involving that averment is 
found, if it appears to the court after verdict, that the verdict could not 
have been found on this issue without proof of this averment then, after 
verdict, the defective averment, though it might have been bad on demurrer, 
is cured by verdict. Heymann v. B., ubi supra : It. v. Goldsmith, L. B., 
2 C. C. B. 74; 42 L. J. (M. C.) 94. In pursuance of this rule, and inde- 
pendently of 7 O. 4, e. 64, s. 21, it was held that, assuming that an indict- 
ment for receiving goods obtained by false pretences, might have been 
quashed or held bad on demurrer for not setting out the false pretences, 
the defect, if any, was cured by verdict. B. v. Goldsmith, vbi supra : 
Taylor v. R. [1895] 1 Q. B. 25; 64 L. J.\M. C.) 11. So also where 
defendant was indicted under 46 & 47 Vict. c. 51 for " corrupt practices " 
at a parliamentary election, without setting out the nature of such 
corrupt practices, as " bribery/' " undue influence," etc., it was held that 
offer verdict no objection could be taken to the indictment for want of 
certainty. B. v. Stroulger, 17 Q. B. D. 327 ; 55 L. J. (M. C.) 137. The 
above rule is applicable only to an averment imperfectly stated, i.e., an 
averment which is stated but which is imperfectly stated. It is not 
applicable to the case of the total omission of an essential averment 
For sneh a total omission the verdict is no cure. And when it is said in 
the rule that the verdict could not have been found without proof of the 
averment, the meaning is, the verdict could not have been found without 
finding this imperfect averment to have been proved in a sense adverse 
to the accused. See the judgment of Brett, J. A., in B. v. A spiv all, 2 
Q. B. D. 48, 58 ; 46 L. J. {M. C.) at pp. 149, 150 : Heymann v. A, L. B. 
8 Q. B. 102; 12 C«c, 383: B. v. Silverlock [1894] 2 Q. B. 766, 772; 63 
L. J. (if. C.) 233 (C. C. B.). 

3. Defects cured by amendment— -These defects have been treated 
seriatim under the preceding paragraphs of this chapter, and the power 
of amendment depends on the statutes set out, ante, pp. 51-55. 

3. Conclusion of the Indictment. 

For an offence at common law.]— An indictment for an offence at 
common law concludes thus : " Against the peace of our lord the King, 
his crown and dignity" Indictments for nuisance usually conclude : 
" to the great damage and common nuisance of all the liege subjects of 
our said lord the King/' etc, as well as " against the peace/' etc : but 
this conclusion, ad commune nocumentum, never seems to have been 
essential. 

Where the offence was committed in one reign and the indictment is 
preferred in another reign, the proper form of conclusion is " against the 
peace of our late lord the King," etc See 1 Chit. Cr. L. 247 ; Lookup v. 
B. t 4 Bro. Pari. Cos. 332; 2 Eng. Rep, 225; 2 Hawk. c. 25, *. 92; and 
for the conclusion of the indictment against the regicides, Kel. (J.) 11. 

For an offence ly statute.]— An indictment for an offence created by 
etatqte concludes ^hqa; '* Against the form of the statute [or statutes'] in 



86 Indictment. 

such case' made and provided, and against the peace of our lord tJte Kino, 
his crown and dignity" 

Formerly great care was necessary in ascertaining whether the indict- 
ment should conclude as for an offence at common law, or as for an offence 
by statute, and in the latter case whether the expression " against tho 
form of the statute "or "against the form of the statutes" should be 
used, and in all cases a proper and formal conclusion was necessary. See 
B. v. Badcliffe U838] 2 Mood. C. C. 68. 

But by the Criminal Procedure Act, 1851 (14 & 15 Vict. c 100), s. 24 
(ante, p. 54), no indictment for any offence shall be held insufficient for the 
omission of the words " against the peace/' nor for the insertion of the 
words " against the form of the statute," instead of " against the form 
of the statutes," or vice versa, nor for want of a proper or formal con- 
clusion. See 1 Buss. Cr. (6th ed.) 37 n. : B. v. Holmes, Dears. 207 ; 22 
L. J. (A/. C.) 122: Castro v. B., 6 App. Cos. 229; 50 L. J. {Q. B.) 497. 
The ruling in B. v. Mayor, etc., of Pcole, 19 Q. B. D. 602, is admittedly 
not law on this point; see 19 Q. B. D. 683 n. It is still the practice, 
and useful for purpose of readily ascertaining the nature of the offence 
charged, to conclude indictments for offences at common law with the 
words " against the peace of our lord the King, his crown and dignity," 
and to conclude indictments for offences by statute with the words 
" against the form of the statute in such case made and provided, and 
against the peace of our lord the King, his crown and dignity." But the 
statute and decisions above stated render the old learning on the subject 
obsolete. 



Sect. 4. 

joinder of two or more defendants in one indictment. 

Where several persons join in the commission of an offence, all or any 
number of them may bo jointly indicted for it, or each of them may be 
indicted separately. Thus, if several commit a robbery, burglary, or 
murder, they may be indicted for it jointly, 2 Hale, 173, or separately ; 
and tho same where two or more together commit a battery, or are 
together guilty of extortion or the like. B. v. Atkinson, 1 Salk. 382. 
And though they have acted separately, yet if the grievance is the result 
of tho acts of all jointly, all may be indicted jointly for the offence. 
B. v. Trajford, IB. <fc Ad. 874. Whero money has been obtained under 
false pretences, and the false pretences were conveyed by words spoken 
by one defendant in the presence of the others, all of whom acted in 
concert together, they may all be indicted jointly. Young v. B., 3 T. J?. 
98. The same rule applies where two or more persons join in singing 
a libellous song; B. v. Benfield, 2 Burr. 980, 935, or in any other 
mode of publishing a defamatory libel. But if the publication of each 
party be distinct, as if two booksellers, not being partners, sell the 
libel at their respective shops, they must be indicted separately. But 
two or more cannot be jointly indioted for perjury, -K. v. Philips, 2 Str. 
921, or for seditious or blasphemous words, or the like, because such 
offences are in their nature several. And even where several commit a 
joint act, which act, however, is not of itself illegal, but becomes so 
merely by reason of some circumstances applicable to each individual 
severally and not jointly, they must be indicted separately ; 2 Hawk. c. 25, 
s. 89 ; thus several partners could be indicted jointly for exercising their 
trade, without having served an apprenticeship. B. v. Atfcinson, 1 Sn r K\ 
382 ; 7.*. v. Weston, 1 Str. 623. 



Joinder of Defendants. #7 

Principals in the first and second degree, and accessories beforo and 
after the fact may all be joined in the same indictment; 2 Hale, 173 ; or 
the principals may be indicted separately, and the accessories may be 
indicted either before or after the conviction of the principals, as for a 
substantive offence. (See ante, pp. 16, 19, and 24 & 25 Vict. c. 94, ss. 2, 3.) 
It is said that several may be jointly indicted for severally erecting 
common inns, ad commune nocumentum, if it be said that they sepnraliter 
erexerunt, eta ; and the same as to keeping disorderly house?, etc. ; 2 Hale, 
174; but it is much betttr, and more usual in practice, to indict the 
proprietor of each house separately. As to separate trials of persons jointly 
indicted, see post, p. 186. 

Misjoinder of defendants may be made the subject of a demurrer, motion 
in arrest of judgment, or writ of error ; or the court may quash the indict- 
ment (see post, p. 120). But where there are different counts against different 
poisons in the same indictment, this, though it may be a ground for moving 
to quash the indictment, is no cause for demurrer, B. v. Kingston, 8 East, 
41, if the counts be such in substance as may be joined. 

Upon an indictment against two persons charging them jointly with an 
offence, as stealing in the dwelling-house, both or either may be found 
guilty, but they cannot be found guilty of separate parts of the charge ; 
and if they be found guilty separately, judgment cannot be passed upon 
one, unless a pardon be obtained or a nolle prosequi be entered as to the 
other. B. v. Hempstead, B. & B. 344. Before 14 & 15 Vict. c. 100, if two 
were charged jointly with receiving stolen goods, a joint act of receiving 
must have been proved : proof that one received in the absence of the 
other, and afterwards delivered to him, would not suffice ; B. v. Messing- 
ham, 1 Mood. C. C. 257 : see B. v. Arc her, lb. 143 ; B. v. Parr, 2 M. & Bob. 
346: B. v. Dovty, 2 Den. 86; 20 L.J. (M. C.) 105; but the 14th section of 
that statute (rep. and re-enacted as 24 & 25 Vict. c. 96, s. 94) provides that if, 
upon the trial of two or more persons indicted for jointly receiving any 
property, it should be proved that one or more of such persons separately 
received any part of such property, it should be lawful for the jury to 
convict upon such indictment suoh of the said persons as should be proved 
to have received any part of such property ; and this enactment extends 
to cases where, upon an indictment for joint receiving, it is proved that 
the prisoners separately received the whole of the stolen property. B. v. 
Beardon, L, B. 1 C. C. B. 31, 35, L.J. {M. C.) 171. Several receivers may 
be charged in the same indictment with separate and distinct acts of 
receiving. 24 <fc 25 Vict c. 96, s. 93. B. v. Pulham, 9 C. & P. 280 : B. v. 
Have*, 2 M. & Bob. 155. Where several persons are indicted for burglary 
ana larceny, one may be found guilty of burglary and larceny, and the 
others of the larceny only. B. v. Butterworth, B. & B. 520. On an indict- 
ment against A. and B. for larceny, with another count against B. for 
receiving, A. was acquitted; B. was found guilty, on evidence which 
proved that he was an accessory before the fact to the larceny, and a 
receiver, and the verdict against him was entered generally ; it was held 
that he was not (since 11 <fc 12 Vict. c. 46, *. 1 (rep.), of which 24 & 25 
Vict. c. 94, *. 1, is a re-enactment) entitled to an acquittal for the larceny. 
B. v. Hughes, Bell, 242; 29 L. J. (M. C.) 71. 



88 Indictment. 



Sect. 5. 

joinder or 6evebal offences in different counts in 

one indictment. 

We have already seen (ante, p. 82) that if a defendant is charged with 
two or more offences in the same count of an indictment, the count will be 
bad for duplicity. Different considerations apply to charging a defendant 
with different offences in different counts of the same indictment Each 
count in an indictment is for the purposes of evidence and judgment a 
separate indictment. Latham v. R. 9 5 B. <fc 8. 635: and see hereon 
Selvester v. U. S., 170 U. 8. 262, where is pointed out the error in R. v. 
Hayes (1727, 2 Ld. Raym. 1518), where the contrary was held. 

Joinder of different treasons.']— In an indictment for high treason, 
there may be different counts, each charging the defendant with a 
different species of treason against the King and his government, such 
as compassing the King's death, levying war, adhering to the King's 
enemies, within 25 Edw. 8, st. 5, c. 2, and the conspiracies to imprison or 
do bodily harm to the King, within 86 G. 3, c. 7, *. 1. And this power is 
extended by statute to treason felony, 11 <£ 12 Vict, c. 12, s. 5. See R. v. 
Mitchel, 6 Si. Tr., N. S. 599, 619. 

Joinder of different felonies."]-— Although it is no objection in point of 
law to an indictment that it charges the prisoner with several different 
felonies in different counts, R. v. ileywood, L. <fc C. 451 ; 33 L. J. (M. C.) 
133; R. v. Eolmanf 9 Cox, 201 (C. C. R.); Castro v. R, 6 App. Cos. 229, 
244 ; 50 L. J. (Q. B.\ at p. 504, yet as a matter of practice a prisoner 
ought not, in general, to oe charged with different felonies in different 
counts of an indictment ; as, for instance, a murder in one count and a 
burglary in another, or a burglary in the house of A. in one count, and 
a distinct burglary in the house of B. in another, or a larceny of the 
goods of A. in one count and a distinct larceny of the goods of B., at a 
different time, in another, because such a course of proceeding is calcu- 
lated to embarrass the prisoner in his defence. As to whether an indict- 
ment may be quashed in such a case, see post, s. 11 (p. 120). It is well 
established by a long series of decisions that the joining of two felonies 
in one indictment (except where the same facts may constitute several 
felonies, Campbell v. R., 11 Q. B. 799, 812) is so necessarily unfair to the 
prisoner that the judge ought, upon an application being made to him, to 
put the prosecutor to his election and send them to two trials. Castro v. 
R., 6 App. Cos., at p. 244 ; 50 L. J. (Q. 2?.), at p. 504. Thus, where an 
indictment charged the prisoner in three several counts with three several 
felonies in sending three separate threatening lotters, Byles, J., compelled 
the prosecutor to elect upon which count he would proceed. R. v. Ward, 
10 Cox, 42. But the joining of several different felonies in different 
counts in the same indictment is no ground for arrest of judgment. 
Young v. R., 3 T. R. 98 : R. v. (Wonnell, 7 St. Tr., N. S. 637, 706: R. v. 
mnlev, 2 M. & Rob. 524 : O'Connell v. R., 5 St. Tr., N.S.I; 11 CI. <fc F. 
155 ; o Eng. Rep. 155. It is said that if objection is taken before plea, the 
court may quash the indictment. See post, s. 11, p. 120. When it is taken 
after the jury are sworn, it is established practice to put the prosecutor to 
his election upon which oharge he will proceed. Young v. R., 3 T. R. 98, 
106 : R. v. Ileywood, ubi wjrra ; O'Connell v. i?„ 5 St. Tr., N. S. 1, 784, 
Tindal, C. J. : R. v. Mitcliel, 6 St. Tr., N. S. 599 ; except in those cases 
where a statute permits the joinder of counts Apr distinct felonies. But 



Joinder of Offences. 89 

upon an indictment for receiving stolen goods, if it appears that the 
articles were received at different time?, the prosecutor must elect as to 
the receipt of which articles he will prosecute for; but the mere probability 
that the goods were received at different times is no ground for putting 
the prosecutor to his election. B. v. Dunn, 1 Mood. C. C. 146 : B. v. 
Hinley, 2 M . & Bob. 524. On the trial of an indictment for robbery, the 
jury may convict of an assault with intent to rob; 24 & 25 Vict. c. 96, s. 
41 ; so that the necessity of several counts in such a case is done away 
with. Where the defendant was indicted under 7 W.i&l Vict. c. 85, ss. 
2, 4, (rep.) in several counts, for stabbing, with intent to murder, with 
intent to maim and disable, and with intent to do some grievous bodily 
harm, it was held that the prosecutor was not bound to elect upon which 
count he would proceed, although the judgment was by the statute 
different, being on the first count capital, and on the others transportation. 

B. v. Strange, 8 C. & P. 172 ; Campbell v. B., 11 Q. B. 799, 812. And where 
to these counts was added a count for a common assault, and the prisoner 
being found guilty of a felonious assault, the verdict was entered on the 
count for stabbing with intent to do grievous bodily harm, under 7 W. 4 
<fe 1 Vict. c. 85 s. 11 (rep.), the conviction was held good. B. v. Jones, 8 

C. & P. 776 ; 2 Mood. C. C. 94 ; see also B. v. Ferguson, Dears. 427 ; 24 
L. J. (M. C.) 61. In a case of arson, the indictment contained five counts, 
each charging a firing of a house of a different owner : but it being opened 
that the five houses were in a row, and the same fire burnt them all, the 
judge would not put the prosecutor to elect, it being all one transaction. 
B. v. Trueman, 8 C. A P. 727 ; and see B. v. Fussell, 6 St. Tr., N. S. 723. 
The application for a prosecutor to elect is an application to the discretion 
of the judge founded on the supposition that the cose extends to more than 
one charge, and may therefore be likely to embarrass the prisoner in his 
defence. Id. : B. v. Hinlty, 2 M.& Bob. 521. It is expressly provided by 
24 & 25 Vict. c. 96, s. 92, that in any indictment for feloniously stealing any 
property, it shall be lawful to add a count or several counts for feloniously 
receiving the same property knowing it to be stolen, and in any indictment 
for feloniously receiving any property knowing it to be stolen, it shall be 
lawful to add a count for feloniously stealing the same; and the prosecutor 
of such indictment is not to be put to any election, but the jury may find 
a verdict of guilty on either count, against all or any of the persons 
charged. But a count for stealing certain property onght not to be joined 
with a couot for receiving the same and other property ; aod if it is, the 
prosecutor will be put to his election. B. v. Ward, 2 F. & F. 19. A 
defendant may be charged as an accessory before the fact in one count, and 
as accessory after the fact in another count, to the same felony, without 
putting the prosecutor to his election, and may be convicted on both counts. 
R. v. blackson, 8 C. & P. 43 ( per Parke, B., after consulting Patteson, J.) ; and 
see R. v. Mitchel, 6 St. Tr., N. S. 599, 620, 621. Where the defendant was 
charged as principal in one count, and as accessory after the fact in another 
count, to the same felony, the prosecution was compelled to elect upon 
which count they would proceed. B. v. Brannon, 14 Cox, 394, Cockburn, 
C.J. But this decision appears to have been given without due regard to 
i. 3 of the Accessories Act, 1861 (ante, p. 20), and in R. v. Tuffin, Guildford 
Assizes, July 22, 1903, Darling, J., held upon a similar indictment that the 
decision in B. v. Blackson should bo preferred to that in B. v. Brannon. A 
defendant may be indicted as a principal in the first degree in one count, 
and as principal in the second degree in another count. B. v. Cray, 7 
C. <fc P. 164. And a receiver may be indicted as an accessory in one count, 
and for a substantive felony in another count; and although, in his 
discretion, the judge may put the prosecutor to his election, he will not 



90 Indictment. 

do so whenever it is clear that there is only one offence, and the joinder of 
counts cannot prejudice the defendant B. v. Austin, 7 C.& P. 796 : B. v. 
Jlartall, Id. 475 : B. v. Wheeler, Id. 170 ; B. v. Pulham, 9 C. & P. 280. 

In indictments for embezzlement, the prosecutor may charge any 
distinct number of acts of embezzlement, not exceeding three, which may 
have been committed against the same master within six months inclusive ; 
24 «fc 25 Vict. c. 96, *. 71. The proper course is to charge the several acts 
in several counts. And in indictments for larceny, it is lawful to insert 
several counts against the same person for any number of distinct acts of 
stealing, not exceeding three, which may have been committed by him 
against the same person within the space of six calendar months from the 
firot to the last of such acts, and to proceed thereon for all or any of them. 
24 £ 25 Vict. c. 96, s. 5. And if the larcenies are all charged in one count 
the indictment will not be quashed ; but the prosecutor will be put to 
elect as to the three takings proved on which he will proceed. B. v. 
Nicholls, 68 J. P. 452 (jG. G. B.). Where under this section the prisoner 
is charged in the same indictment with more larcenies than one, the 
indictment ought to aver that the subsequent larcenies were committed 
within six months of the first larceny charged. So where an indictment 
contained a charge of stealing on the 13th of February, and another 
charge of stealing on the 15th of the same month, but did not aver that 
the larcenies were within six months of each other, Pollock, C.B., put the 
prosecution to elect on which charge to proceed. II. v. Lonsdale, 4 F. & F. 
5G. By 24 & 25 Vict. c. 96, s. 6, if, upon the trial of any indictment for 
larceny, it shall appear that the property alleged to have been stolen was 
taken at different times, the prosecutor shall not by reason thereof be 
required to elect upon which taking he will proceed, unless it shall appear 
that there were more than three takings, or that more than six calendar 
months elapsed between the first and the last of such takings ; and in 
either of such last-mentioned cases, the prosecutor shall be required to 
elect to proceed for such number of takings, not exceeding three, as 
appear to have taken place within the period of six calender months from 
the first to the last of such takings. As to indictments where the offenco 
charged is continuous, see B. V. Ilinley, 2 Mood. <k Bob. 524 : B. v. £ leas- 
dale, 2C.&K. 765, Eric, J. : B. v. Shepherd, L. B. 1 C. O. B. 118 : B. v. 
Firth, L. B. 1 C. C. B. 172 : B. v. Kenwood, 11 Cox, 526 (C. C. 1Q. 

So, upon an indictment for embezzlement, if the offence upon the 
evidence appear to be larceny, the jury may acquit the prisoner of the 
embezzlement, and find him guilty of 6implo larceny, or of larceny as 
clerk or servant ; or upon an indictment for larceny* if upon the evidence 
it appear to be embezzlement, the jury may acquit of the larceny, and 
find the party guilty of the embezzlement. 24 cfc 25 Vict. c. 96, s. 72. 

In framing an indictment under 46 <fe 47 Vict. c. 3 (Explosive Sub- 
stances Act, 1883), it is provided by s. 7. subs. 2 of that Act, that the 
same criminal Act may be charged in different counts as constituting 
different crimes under that Act, and upon the trial of any such indictment 
the prosecutor shall not be put to his election as to the count on which 
he must proceed. 

Although a prosecutor is not, in general, permitted to charge a 
defendant with different felonies in different counts, yet he may charge 
the same felony in different ways in several counts, in order to meet the 
facts of the case, or join counts, where they relate to one and the samo 
transaction. B . v. Fussell, 6 St. ZV., N. S. 723, 726 ; or where the evidence 
applicable to each is the same. B. v. Basset, 1 Cox, 51 : as, for instance, 
if there be a doubt whether the goods stolen, or the bouse in which a 
burglary or larceny was committed, be the goods or house of A. or B., 



Joinder of Offences. .91 

they may be stated in one count as the goods or house of A., and in 
Mother as the goods or house of B. See B. v. Egginion, 2 B. <t P. 508 ; 
5 £.£.689; Campbell v. 2?., 11 Q. B. 799, 812. And the verdict may be 
taken generally on the whole indictment. B. v. Downing, 1 Den. 52; 2 
°. <£ IT. 382. But, inasmuch as the word " felony " is not nomen colleeiivurn 
(as " misdemeanor " is, see Byalls v. B., 11 Q. A 781, 795), if the verdict 
and judgment in snch a case is against the defendant for " the felony afore- 
said,' 1 it will be had unless the verdict and judgment are warranted by 
each count of the indictment. Campbell v. B., 11 Q. B. 799, 814. 

The proper course is to enter up the verdict and judgment separately 
on each count. O' Connell v. It., 5 St. Tr. t N. S. 1 ; Latham v. B. t 5 B. <t S. 
635. 

On the abolition of tho benefit of clergy in 1827 it was specially pro- 
vided that the change in the law should not prevent the joinder in any 
indictment of any counts which might have been joined before the passing 
of the Act 7&8 G. 4, c. 28, *. 6. 

Joinder of counts for felony and misdemeanor.] — The joinder of a count 
for felony, with a count for misdemeanor, would beheld bad on demurrer, 
or, after a gmeral verdict, on motion in arrest of judgment. Young v. B., 
3 T. B. 98, 108 ; Slarkie, Cr. PI 43. The reason is that the challenges 
and the incidents of trial are not the same in felony and misdemeanor, 
and therefore felony and misdemeanor could not be tried together. Castro 
v. J?., 6 App. Cos. at p. 244 : and it is universal practice not to join such 
counts. But where an indictment contains a count for felony, and also 
a count for misdemeanor, and the prisoner is convicted of the felony alone, 
such joinder of counts for felony and misdemeanor furnishes no ground 
for arresting the judgment. B. v. Ferguson, Dears. 427 ; 24 L. J. (M. C.) 
61 : if. v. Jones, 2 Mood. C. C. 94 : 8 C. & P. 172. On an indictment for 
felony the jury can convict of the attempt to commit the felony if the jury 
satisfied that the felony was not completed. 14 & 15 Vict. c. 100, s. 9. 



Joinder of different misdemeanors.] — Indictments for misdemeanors may 
contain several counts for different offences, even, as it seems, though 
the judgments upon each be different. Voting v. B., 3 T. B. 98, 105, 106 : 
li. v. Towle, B. <fr B. 314: 3 Price, 145; 2 Marsh. (C. P.) 466: B. v. 
Johnson, 3 M. <fc SeL 539 ; 16 B. B. 352 : B. v. Kingston, 8 East, 41, 46 : 
and see B. v. Benfield, 2 Burr. 980, 984 : B. v. Jones, 2 Camp. 131 ; Dick. 
Q. & 190 «. (I); Pritchard Q. S. (2nd ed.) 151; Starkie's Cr. PL 43. 
Even where several persons were charged in different counts with 
offences of the same nature, the court held that it was no ground for 
a demurrer, though it might be for an application to the discretion 
of the court to quash the indictment. B. v. Kingston, 8 East. 41, 46. 
Still, if an indictment for misdemeanor contains several counts charging 
distinct misdemeanors against tho defendant committed on totally 
different occasions and relating to different subject matters, and tho 
presiding judge sees that tho accused may be embarrassed in his defence 
oy the number of charges, the probability is that he would either quash 
the indictment or put the prosecutor to his election upon which charge 
he would proceed. R. t. Castro, L. B., 5 Q. B. D. 490, 501, 510 : 
(hstro v. B. t 6 App. Cos. 229, 245; 49 L. J. {Q. B.) t 747; 50 L. J. (Q. B.) 
497. Though Dot illegal, it is hardly fair to put a man upon his trial 
on an indictment containing forty counts, involving several distinct 
ch*ms of false pretences ; for it would be almost impossible that he 
afco« not be grievously prejudiced as regards each one of the charges 
l^eMence which is being given upon the others. In such a case it 



02 Indictment. 

would Dot be unreasonable for the defendant to make an application that 
each count or each set of counts should be taken separately ; per Hawkins, 
J., R. v. King [1897] 1 Q. B. 214, 216 : 66 L. J. (Q. B.) 81. If the joinder 
is embarrassing, the court may put the prosecutor to his election; 
B. v. Fvssell, 6 St. Tr., N. S. 723 ; Wilde, C. J., Parke, B., and Mauh, J. ; 
or, it is said, may quash the indictment. But there is no precedent 
for the adoption of this course, and on principle it is difficult to see tho 
right of the court to quash a count unless it is bad or illegally found. 
In R. v. Braun, 9 Cox, 284, Martin, B., on an indictment charging 
conspiracy and offences against the bankruptcy lav, required the 
prosecution to elect on which set of counts they would go to the jury. 
Where two defendants were indicted for a conspiracy and a libel, and at 
the close of the case for the prosecution there was evidence against both 
as to the conspiracy, but against one only as to the libel, the judge then 
put the prosecutor to elect upon which charge he would proceed. R. v. 
Murphy, 8 C. & P. 297. On an indictment for conspiracy to defraud by 
making false lists of goods destroyed by fire, one set of counts related to 
a fire in June, 1864, and another to a fire in November, 1864. The 
prosecution was compelled to elect which charge of conspiracy should be 
first tried, and to confine the evidence wholly to that in the first instance. 
R. y. Barry, 4 F. & F. 389. And on an indictment against the manager 
and secretory of a joint-stock bank containing many counts, some 
charging that the defendants concurred in publishing false statements of 
the affairs of the bank, and others that they conspired together to do so, 
the prosecutors were put to elect on which set of counts they would rely. 
R. v. Burch, 4F.&F. 407. Hereon see B. v. Solan, 21 N. Z. L. R. 217, 
220. The exercise of the judge's discretion upon this point could not be 
reviewed by writ of error. R. v. Castro, 5 Q. B. D. 490, 501 ; 49 L. J. 
(Q. B.), at p. 752; and although where two separate felonies are charged 
in separate counts of the same indictment it is almost a matter of course 
for the judge, upon application, to compel the prosecutor to elect upon 
which charge he will proceed, it is by no means a matter of course for 
the judge to put the prosecutor to his election, where two or more 
separate misdemeanors are charged in different counts in the same 
indictment. Castro v. R., 6 App. Cos. at pp. 244, 245 ; 50 L. J. (Q. B.) 
at pp. 504, 505. If, where there are several counts charging different 
offences in law, the judgment be entered up generally upon all, that the 
defendant "for his said offences " be adjudged, etc, and it appears that 
any count was bad in law, the judgment will be reversed on error. 
O'Connell v. R., 5 St. Tr., N.S.I; 11 CI. A F. 155 : 8 Eng. Rep. 155. To 
prevent this, it is now usual, in cases of misdemeanor, to pronounce and 
enter up the same judgment separately, on each count of the indictment 
Where a prisoner is indicted for an offence, it is not necessary to add 
another count for an attempt to commit it ; because upon an indictment 
for felony or misdemeanor, if upon the trial it appear that the defendant 
merely attempted to commit the offence, but did not complete it, tho 
jury may acquit him of the offence charged, and find him guilty of the 
attempt. 14 <fc 15 Vict c. 100, s. 9 (see post, p. 219). If upon an indictment 
for obtaining money or goods by false pretences, the offence upon the 
evidence turn out to be larceny, the defendant notwithstanding may be 
convicted of the false pretences. 24 & 25 Vict. c. 96, s. 88. So, upon an in- 
dictment for any misdemeanor, if the facts given in evidence to prove the 
misdemeanor amount in law to a felony, the defendant shall not on that 
account be acquitted of the misdemeanor, unless the court think fit to 
discharge the jury, and order the defendant to be indicted for the felony. 
14 <fc J.5 Vict, c ICQ, s. lg. But- this provision applies only where the 



The Caption. 93 

facts given in evidence prove the act charged in the indictment; there- 
fore, where on indictment for misdemeanor in having carnal knowledge 
of a girl between ten and twelve years of age, under 9 O. 4, c. 81, s. 17 
(rep.\ the girl was proved to be under ten years of age, and consequently 
a felony had been committed, it was rnled that the above section did not 
apply, that the indictment could not be amended under 14 <fc 15 Vict. 
c 100, s. 1 {ante, p. 52), and that the prisoner must be acquitted, and the 
defendant if acquitted cannot be again tried on the same facts for the 
offence actually dif closed. R. v. Shott, 3C.&K. 206, Maule, J. ; sed quaere, 
tee 2 Taylor Eo. (9th ed.) 1128 n. 

In these cases it is unnecessary to prefer a second bill, or to add a 
second count (where that can be done) for the offence of which the 
defendant may be thus convicted. 

It has been held that the court will not order counts to be struck out 
of an indictment, because it is the finding of a grand jury, and not the 
mere suggestion of the party as in a civil pleading. R. v. Pewtress, 
2 Sir. 1026. 



Sect. 6. 
the caption. 



The caption is no part of the indictment. 2 Hale 165 : O* Council r. 
R. 9 5 St. Tr., N. S. 1, 35 ; Arm. & Trevor (Tr.) 41. It is merely a copy of the 
entry of the style, and commission of the court where the indictment is 
preferred, and of the proceedings leading up to the finding of the bill 
(R. v. Martin, 6 St. Tr., N. S. 925, 1091 ; 12 Ir. L. R. 399), which is prefixed 
as a kind of preamble to the indictment upon the record, when the record 
iB made up for the purposes of a count of error, or when it is returned 
to a certiorari. The following is a form of the caption to an indictment 
in a court of quarter sessions : — 

" Wkstmobbland : Be it remembered that at the general quarter sessions 
of (he peace of our sovereign lord the King, holden at Appleby, in and for the 

county aforesaid, the day of , in the year of the reign of our 

sovereign lord Edward the Seventh, of the United Kinadom of Great Britain 
and Ireland, and of the British dominions beyond the seas King, Defender 
of the Faith, before A. B. and C. D., Esquires, and other their associates, 
justices of our said lord the King, assigned to keep the peace of our said lord 
the King in the said county, and also to hear and determine divers felonies, 
trespasses, and other misdemeanors, in the said county committed, by the 
oath of" [the grand jurors, naming them] " good and lawful men of the 
county aforesaid, sworn and charged to inquire for our said lord the King, 
and for the body of the county aforesaid, it is presented, in manner and 
form as appears by the indictment hereunto annexed." 

By the Court, 
A. B., Clerk of the Peace. 

(See Short A Mettor Cr. Of. Pr. 103, 107 : 2 Bale 165 : R. v. Feamley, 
1 Leach, 425 ; 1 T. R. 816 ; and the forms, 4 Went. 41, 105, 132, 150, 174, 
222; 6 Went 1, 357, 873; 2 Hawk, c 23, ss. 118, 126, 127, 128; 2 Salk. 
605: R. v. Warre, 2 Sir. 698. The words u sworn and charged " are not 
essential. R. v. Martin, 6 St. Tr., N. S. 925, 1091, and cases there cited. 
See also the form of caption suggested in Short and Mellvr Crown Office 
Practice, p. 704.) 



04 Indictment. 

In R. v. McKteotr [1871] lr. Rep., 5 C. L. 86, a caption describing a 
session as held before " A. B n Esq., deputy chairman " of Quarter Sessions, 
was held sufficient 

A proper caption should show that the court of trial had jurisdiction, 
and that the indictment was found by a sufficient number of grand 
jurors. It has been usual to insert the names of twelve grand jurors at 
the least in the caption, and Bale says that this is necessary ; for it may 
be that the presentment was by a less number than twelve, in which case 
it is not good; 2 Hale, 167; but in Aylett v. J?., 3 Bro. P. C. 529 ; 1 Eng. 
Rep. 1479 ; 6 A. & E. 247, n., where it was objected upon error that the 
caption did not contain the names of any of the jurors, the House of 
Lords, after consulting the judges, affirmed the judgment of the court of 
King's Bench, that this was not essential ; and in R. v. Marsh, 6 A.& E. 
236, Denman, L.C. J., agreed that the insertion of the names is not neces- 
sary. See aho R. v. Barley, 4 East, 174, 176, n. : R. v. Davis, 1 G. <fc P. 
470. The caption ought to state them to be jurors of the county ; White, 
head v. R., 7 Q. B. 582. It should also state them to be good and lawful 
men (probi et legates homines), Id., 2 Hale, 167, and early cases collected in 
Huband, Grand Jury (Jr.), 201, 202. But the court will presume them to 
be so even if the statement is not made. Mansell v. R., 8 St. Tr. t N. S. 831 ; 
8 E. <fc B. 54 ; 27 L. J. (M. C.) 4 : and see Martin v. R., 6 St. Tr., N. S. 925 ; 
12 Jr. L. R. 399. No objection can be sustained to the caption of an indict- 
ment for an allegation that the grand jurors were " sworn and affirmed/ 1 
without showing that those who were sworn were persons who ought to 
have been affirmed, or that those who were affirmed were persons who 
ought to have been sworn. Mulcahy v. R., L. R. 3 //. L. 306, 322 : Ir. 
Rep. 1 C. L. 13. As to the mode of rectifying a mistake in the caption, 
see R. v. Justices of Middlesex, b B.& Ad. 1113, and R. v. Marsh, ubi supra. 

The caption if erroneously drawn up may be amended. R. v. Darley, 
ubi supra : R. v. Davis, ubi supra : Faulkner's case, 1 Wms. Saunders 
(6th ed.), 248. 

There is, it would seem, only one original general caption for the whole 
sessions. R. v. Marsh, 6 A. & E. 236, 249, Williams, J., Coleridge, J. 
Objection may be taken to the caption by demurrer; R. v. Fearnley, 
1 T. R. 316 ; or by writ of error, whether the error be of fact or law. 
R. v. Marsh, ubi supra, at 243, Denman, L.C J. : R. v. McKeever [1871]. 
Ir. Rep. 5 C. L. 86. 



Sect. 7. 

within what time the bill must be pbeferred. 

At common law, there is no time limited for commencing a suit by 
the King; and therefore, in all cases of treason, felony, and misdemeanor, 
where a time is not limited by statute, the indictment may be preferred 
at any length of time after the offence. In the case of offences punishable 
summarily, even where the accused may elect to be tried on indiotment, 
the summary proceedings must be instituted within six months of the 
offence, unless it is a continuing offence : London County Council v. Worley 
[1891] 2 Q. B. 826; or unless another limitation is given by statute for 
the particular prosecution. 11 & 12 Vict. c. 43, s. 11 ; see Douglas, Summary 
Jurisdiction Procedure (8th ed.), pp. 52-59. In criminal oases within the 
Summary Jurisdiction Acts, the laying of the information is the com- 
mencement of the prosecution ; Beardsley v. Giddings [1904] 1 K. B. 847 : 
Brooks v. Bagshaw [1904] 68 J. P. 514 : R. v. Priestley [1886J 49 J. P. 148 ; 



Limitation of Time, 95 

but qiixre when though tho information is laid before process is granted 
after the expiration of the time limited. The oldest authorities seem to 
treat the arrest as the commencement of the prosecution at common law ; 
2 Hale, 72 ; bnt under the different statutes creating limitations (stated 
below) there have been somewhat varying interpretations of what con- 
stituted the commencement of the prosecution. 

The following are the chief statutory limitations on the prosecution of 
indictable offences: — 

Treason.]— Indictments for such high treasons as caused corruption of 
blood (with the exception of treason, by "designing, endeavouring, or 
attempting any assassination on the body of the King by poison, or other- 
wise" (7 & 8 W. 3, c 3, s. 6), must be found by the grand jury within 
three years next after the offence committed, if the offence have been 
committed within England, Wales, Berwick-upon-Tweed (7 & 8 W. 3, 
r. 3, s. 5), or Scotland (see 7 Anne, c. 21, Fast 249); but if committed on 
the high seas or in a foreign country, there is no time limited for the 
prosecution. 

Blasphemy,}— An " information" for blasphemy by words 6poken must 
be laid within four days of the speaking, and the prosecution must be 
within three months of the information. 9 W. 3, c. 35 (9 <fc 10 W. 3, c 32, 
Ruff head), s.2; cf. 19 G. 2, c. 21, s. 12, as to profane swearing. 

Riot] — Prosecutions for offences against the Riot Act (10. 1, st. 2, c. 5) 
most be commenced within twelve months after the offence committed 

(8.8). 

Unlawful drilling.] — Prosecutions under the Unlawful Dialling Act, 
1829 (60 G. 3 & 1 G. 4, c. 1), must be " commenced within six calendar 
months after the offence committed " («. 7). 

Night podding.] — Prosecutions by indictment under the Night Poach' 
ing Ad, 1828, must be " commenced within twelve calendar months after 
the commission of the offence." 9 G. 4, c. 69, s. 4. For the cases hereon 
tee post, p. 97. 

Revenue offences.] — " Indictments, or informations brought or exhibited 
for any offence against the Customs Acts, in any court or before any justice, 
shall be brought or exhibited within three years next after the date of 
the offence committed. 1 ' 39 & 40 Vict: c. 36, s. 257. See R. v. Thompson, 
16 Q. B. 832; 20 L. J. (M. C.) 183; 5 Cox, 166, on the similar provisions 
of a repealed Customs Act. 

Penal statutes.] — All indictments or informations upon any penal 
statute, whereby the forfeiture is limited to the King, must be brought 
within two years after the offence committed ; if the forfeiture be limited 
to the King and prosecutor, the suit must be in one year; and in default 
thereof, the same must be sued for by the King within two years after 
that year ended ; but where a statute limits a shorter time, the suit must 
be brought within such time limited. 31 Eliz. c. 5, s. 5. As to informa- 
tions instituting summary proceedings, this Act is repealed by 11 <fe 12 
Vict c 43, ». 36. 

Charges against officials.] — Prosecutions for " any act done in pursuance, 
or execution, or intended execution, of any Act of Parliament, or of any 



96 Indictment. 

public duty or authority, or in respect of any allegel neglect or default 
in the execution of any such act, duty, or authority, shall not lie or be 
instituted unless commenced within six months next after the act, neglect, 
or default complained of, or " in case of a continuance of injury or damage " 
(e.g., in case of a public nuisance) " within six months next after the 
ceasing thereof." 56 & 57 Vict. c. 61, #. 1 (a). This Act expressly or 
impliedly repeals the particular limitation clauses in prior public general 
Acts. See s. 2, Schedule. 

Corrupt or illegal practices.}--A proceeding against a person in respect 
of the offence of a corrupt or illegal practice or any other offence at par- 
liamentary elections must be commenced within one year after the offence 
was committed, or if it was committed in reference to an election with 
respect to which an inquiry is held by election commissioner* must be 
commenced within one year after tbe offence was committed, or within 
three months after the report of such commissioners is made, whichever 
period last expires, so that it be commenced within two years after the 
offence was committed. The issue of a summons, warrant, writ, or other 
process, shall be deemed to be a commencement of a proceeding, where 
the service or execution of the same on or against the alleged offender is 
prevented by the absconding or concealment or act of the alleged offender ; 
but save as aforesaid the service or execution of the same on or against 
the alleged offender, and not the issue thereof, shall be deemed to be the 
commencement of the proceeding. 46 <£ 47 Vict. c. 51, s. 51. Tbe same 
period of limitation applies to proceedings for similar offences at municipal 
elections, as the above section is incorporated in the Municipal Election* 
(Corrupt and Illegal Practices) Act, 1834 (47 rf-48 Vict. c. 70), by sect 30 
of the later Act ; and it also applies to municipal elections in the city of 
London, 47 & 48 Vict. c. 70, s. 35 ; and to offences in connection with 
elections for county councils (51 & 52 Vict. c. 41, s. 75), district or parish 
councils and boards of guardians (56 <fc 57 Vict, c 73, s. 48), and metro- 
politan boroughs (62 & 63 Vict. c. 14). 

Offences against girls.] — Prosecutions for the offences of unlawfully and 
carnally knowing, or attempting to have unlawful carnal knowledge, of 
any girl being of or above the age of thirteen years and under the age of 
sixteen years, must be commenced not more than six months after the 
commission of tbe offence. 48 & 49 Vict. c. 69, s. 5 : as amended by 4 
Edw. 7, c. 15, «. 27. Commencement of a prosecution for rape within the 
six months is sufficient though in the result the accused is indicted 
and convicted under this section. R. v. West [18981 1 Q. B. C. 174. 
18 Cox, 675 (C. C. R.). 

Registration of births and deaths.] — A prosecution on indictment for an 
offence under the Births and Deaths Registration Act, 1874, must bo 
commenced within three years after the commission of such offence. 
87 & 38 Vict. c. 88, *. 46. 

Marriages.'] — Prosecutions for the felony of unduly solemnizing mar- 
riage must be commenced " within the space of three years after the 
offence committed." 4 G. 4, c 76, s. 21. A like limitation applies to 
prosecutions for offences under the Marriage Act, 1836 (6 A 7 Will. 4, c. 85, 
s. 41). Perjury under the Marriage Act, 1840 (3 & 4 Vict. c. 72),*. 4, must 
be prosecuted before " the expiration of eighteen calendar months from 
the solemnization of such marriage." 

Merchandise Mark*.]— No prosecution for an offence against tbe 



Limitation of Time. 97 

Merchandise Marks Act* 1887, shall be commenced after the expiration of 
three years next after the commission of the offence, or of one year next 
after the first discovery thereof by the prosecutor, whichever expiration 
fort happens. 50 <fc 51 Vict, c. 28, s. 15. 

Commencement of prosecution."] — The commencement of prosecution is 
the preferring of the indictment or laying of the information. The time 
is calculated by excluding the day on which the offence is said to have 
been committed, and including the day on which the prosecution begins. 
PeUew t. Inhabitants of East Wonford, 9 B. & C. 134 : Williams v. Burgess, 
12 A. & E. 635 : Badcliffe ▼. Bartholomew [1892] 1 Q. B. 161 : 61 L. J. 
(If. C.) 63. Sundays are included in computing the time unless expressly 
excluded. JK. y. Middlesex Justices, 2 Dowl. (N. S.) 719, 724 : Maxwell on 
Statutes (3rd ed.), 490. In Acts passed since 1850 " month" means 
calendar month. 52 <fc 53 Vict, a 63, s. 3. 

In B. v. Willace, 1 East, P. C. 186, it was held, upon the repealed statutes 
relating to coin, that the information and proceeding before the magis- 
trate, upon the defendant's being taken, was to be deemed the " com- 
mencement of the prosecution" within the meaning of those Acts. 
Proof by parol that the prisoner was apprehended for high treason 
respecting the coin, within three months after the commission of an 
offence for high treason against the coin within 8 & 9 W.S,c. 26, s. 1 (rep.), 
wai held insufficient, where the indictment was after the three months, 
and the warrants to apprehend and to commit and the depositions taken 
before the justices were not produced. B. v. Phillips, R. & B. 369. The 
head note in this case seems to be inaccurate. See B. v. Jack, 6 Queensland 
L- J. 60, 63, Griffith, C.J. 

The provisions of the Night Poaching Act, 1828 (9 O. 4, c. 69), s. 4, are 
satisfied if information is laid and warrant is issued and executed within 
the year. B. v. Brooks, 1 Den. 217 ; C. & K. 402 ; 2 Cox, 436. So, where 
the warrant of commitment for the offence was within the time limited, 
but the indictment not till afterwards, this was held sufficient. B. v. 
Austin, I C. & K. 621. The mere issuing of a warrant to apprehend the 
defendant has been held not to be a commencement of the prosecution, 
within 9 £. 4, c 69, s. 4, unless it be shown to have been executed within 
the time limited for the commencement of the prosecution. B. v. Hull, 
2 F. & F. 16 : B. v. Casbolt, 11 Cox, 385. And proof of the existence of 
a warrant to apprehend the defendants is not evidence of the commence- 
ment of such a prosecution, although the warrant was issued within the 
twelve months prescribed by that section, and although it recites the 
laying of tbe information. The information itself must be given in 
evidence. B. v. Parker, L. & C. 459 ; 33 L. J. (M. C.) 135. Where a 
man was indicted in 1869 for night poaching alleged to have been com- 
mitted in 186*3, and pleaded guilty, he was allowed to withdraw that plea 
and to plead not guilty, and an acquittal was directed on failure to 
produce an information and warrant showing that the prosecution had 
men commenced within twelve calendar months. B. v. Casbolt, 11 Cox, 
385 In R ▼- KtT^Tninster, 7 C. & P. 228, an indictment for night poach- 
in? vas oreferred against the defendant within twelve months after the 
ammissEm of the oflfence, and was ignored ; four years afterwards another 
2n^^««^? against him for the same offence, and upon an objection 
Ml wis ft>a ^**g n ^ waB out of time, Coleridge, J., doubted whether the 
S: • f • JxZ^TmM not a proceeding sufficient to entitle prosecutor to 
fat ^^^JlZl^ the point, but the defendant was acquitted upon the 
W*** : <T e ^^AdZm ▼. Bristol Inhabitants, 2 A. & E. 389 ; 8. C. sub nom. 

™*J^J*J*ZrlZ 4#- * M - 144 > * L.J. (K. B.) 35. 

Sarah Till Adam, etc-, * ^ \ ' 7 



A-C.P- 



1)8 Indictment. 

Sect. 8. 
indictment, how found. 

In ordinary cases, upon furnishing the clerk of assize, clerk of arraigns, 
or clerk of the indictments at the assizes, or the clerk of the peace at 
sessions, with the particulars of the offence, he will draw the indictment; 
but in cases where more than ordinary care may be requisite in framing 
the indictment, it is better to get it drawn by counsel, and then let it be 
engrossed on plain parchment, without stamp. Indorse on it the names 
of the witnesses intended to be examined before the grand jury. 

" No clerk of assize, clerk of the peace or other person whatsoever . . . 
shall demand or receive more than two shillings for the drawing of any 
bill of indictment," against any felon against whom witnesses have been 
bound by recognizance to appear before a court of assize. 10 W. 3, c. 12 
(c. 23, Ruffhead), s. 7. " If any clerk of assize, clerk of the crown, clerk 
of the peace, clerk of the indictments, or other proper office or their clerks 
or deputies, shall draw any bill of indictment defective, they shall draw 
sew bills without demanding any fee or reward whatsoever, or forfeit the 
sum of £5 with full costs of suit " (Id. s. 8). 

The grand jurors are summoned by the sheriff, or if he is disqualified 
for any cause, by the coroner. See R. v. McGuire [1898] 34 New Brunswick 
430, and as to objections to the grand jurors, post, p. 101. 

The grand jurors must be sworn or affirmed "before they can find a bill 
of indictment laid before them. The form of oath as administered to the 
foreman is as follows : 

" You, as foreman of the grand inquest for our Sovereign lord, the 

King, for the body of this "county of , shall diligently enquire and 

true presentment make of all such matters and things as shall be given 
you in charge, or shall otherwise come to your knowledge touching this 
present service. The King's counsel, your fellows* and your own you shall 
observe and keep secret : you shall pi'esent no one through envy, hatred or 
malice: neither shall you leave any one unpresented through fear, favour or 
affection, gain, reward, or the hope thereof : but you shall present all things 
truly and indifferently as they shall come to your knowledge, according to the 
best of your skill and understanding. So help you God." (See 2 Hale, 161). 

The other jurors take a similar oath. When ail the grand jurors are 
sworn they are charged by the presiding judge as to the bills of indict- 
ment to be sent before them and advised as to whether the evidence (as 
disclosed by the depositions taken before the committing magistrates) is 
such as to constitute a prima facie case against the accused : but they 
are entitled to exercise their own discretion on each bill when it comes 
before them. After being charged they retire to the grand jury chamber 
to consider the bills. As a general rule the solicitor for the prosecution 
is not admitted to the chamber : but at the Central Criminal Court the 
solicitor is admitted in very difficult or complicated cases, by written 
order of the clerk of the court (Rules, Dec. 12, 1892, r. 6). 

It has always been usual in England to swear the witnesses to be 
called before the grand jury: R. v. Dickinson, li. A R. 401. In Ireland 
they were neither sworn nor examined until 1816 (56 G. 3, c. 87). 

At common law it was necessary that some officer of the court (which 
term includes the crier), after the indictment was engrossed (R. v. Tew, 
Dears. 429 ; 21 L. J. (M. C.) 62) should administer the oath to the wit- 
nesses in open court, and then the indictment was laid by the proper 
officer before the grand jury. The Grand Jury Act, 1856 (19 ifc 20 Vict. 



Finding by Grand Jury. 99 

c. 54) dispensed with the swearing of the witnesses in open court (s. 2). 
Under that Act the "foreman" of the grand jury, or any other member 
of the grand jury who may for the time being act on behalf of the fore- 
man in the examination of witnesses in support of any bill or indictment 
(«. 3), is authorised and required to administer an oath (or an affirmation, 
where by law it is required or allowed to be taken in lieu of an oath (s. 3) 
to all persons who appear before the grand jury to give evidence in sup- 
port of any bill of indictment, and all such persons, attending before any 
grand jury to give evidence, may be sworn and examined upon oath by 
the grand jury touching the matters in question. The name of every 
witness examined or intended to be so examined shall be indorsed on the 
bill of indictment, and the foreman of the grand jury shall write his 
initials against the name of each witness so sworn and examined touching 
such bill of indictment. The Act does not affect the fees by law payable 
to any officer of any court for swearing witnesses. Similar provisions are 
made as to Ireland by 1 & 2 Vict. c. 37, which repealed 56 G. 3, c. 87. It 
would seem that the enactments as to endorsing the names of the witnesses 
and initialling the names of those sworn before the grand jury are direc- 
tory only. O'Connell v. R., 11 CI, & F. 155, 405; 8 Eng. Rep., 155, 404; 
5 St. Tr., N. S. 1, 899, Lard Campbell : R. v. Townsend, 28 Nova Scotia, 
468 : R. v. Buchanan, 12 Manitoba, 190, 193. 

It used to be held that two indictments founded on the same facts, one 
for capital felony under a statute, and another for a misdemeanor at 
common law, ought not to be preferred at the same time. See R. v. 
Doran (1790), 1 Leach, 538 : R. v. Smith, 3 C. &. P. 412 : R. v. Flower, Id. 
413, and it was usual to grant one indictment as to put the prosecutor to 
his election upon which indictment he would proceed. But if this course 
were not taken no objection or arrest of judgment could be taken after 
verdict. Young y.R.,3 T. R. 98, 103, Buller, J. But the High Court will 
not quash them if found. R. v. Stockley, 3 Q. B. 238; 11 L. J. (M. C.) 
105. And it is now common practice to send up two indictments, where 
on the facts it is not clear whether a felony or a misdemeanor has been 
committed. 

Indictments for offences within the Vexatious Indictments Act, 1859 
(22<fe 23 Vict. c. 17), must not be sent before the jury unless the procedure 
prescribed by the statutes {ante, p. 7) has been followed ; and, if pre- 
sented or found in contravention of the statutes, may be quashed. See 
post, p. 120. 

After the indictment has been taken to the grand jury-room, it comes 
under the consideration of the grand jury in its turn. The witnesses for 
the prosecution are then called in, in the order in which their names are 
indorsed on the indictment, and are sworn and examined by the grand 
jury. Refusal to be sworn is punishable as contempt of court. R. v. 
Lord Preston, 12 St. Tr. 645 ; and if there should appear to a majority of 
the jury (consisting of twelve at least) " probable evidence " of the offence 
charged (2 Hale, 157), the clerk of the grand jury will indorse on the 
indictment, " True Bill ; " but if the majority should be of opinion that 
the offence has not been sufficiently proved, the words " No true bill " 
are in that case indorsed on the indictment. Afterwards, the foreman, 
accompanied by the other grand jurors, carries the indictments so indorsed 
into court, and delivers them to the clerk of arraigns or the court, who 
thereupon states to the court the substance of each, and the indorsement 
upon it. In strict legal parlance, an indictment is not so called, until it 
has been found a " true bill " by the grand jury ; before that it is named 
a " bill of indictment" merely. 

The grand jury may present an indictment on their own knowledge, 



100 Indictment. 

nor can any inquiry be made as to whether witnesses were properly 
sworn before them (see form of oath, ante, p. 98, B. v. Bussett, C. & Mar, 
247 : B. v. BuUard, 12 Cox, 8&) : bat they may if they think fit require 
the same evidence, written and parol, as may be necessary to support the 
indictment at the trial. They are not, however, usually very strict as to 
the documentary evidence ; they often admit copies where the originals 
alone are evidence ; and sometimes even evidence by parol of a matter 
which should be proved by written evidence. But as they may insist on 
the same strictness of proof as must be observed at the trial, it is prudent 
in all cases to be provided, at the time the bill is preferred, with the 
same evidence with which you intend afterwards to support the indict- 
ment In B. v. Clements, 2 Den. 251 ; 20 L. J. (M. C.) 193 ( C. C. B.), the 
deposition of the prosecutrix, which had been allowed by the judge to be 
read in evidence before the grand jury after a statement by counsel for 
the prosecution that she was so ill as to be unable to travel, that the 
deposition had been taken by the magistrate in the presence of the 
prisoners, who had an opportunity for cross-examination, and was signed 
by the prosecutrix and the magistrate, and that witnesses to prove all 
the above facts were in attendance, was held to have been rightly so 
read; but the point as to whether evidence on oath should have been 
first given does not seem to have been raised. In B. v. Philip, 1 F. <fe F. 
105, Erie, J., the evidence of a medical man was held necessary as a 
condition precedent to the deposition being read before the grand jury 
(cf. B. v. Wilson, 12 Cox, 622, Lush, J.). And in B. v. Beaver, 10 Cox, 274, 
Byles, J., held that this could not be done unless the presiding judge has, 
by evidence taken in the presence of the accused, satisfied himself of the 
existence of the facts required by *. 17 of 11 & 12 Vict, c 42, to make the 
deposition admissible. But this decision is adversely criticised in a note 
(at p. 275), and in a subsequent case, B. v. Bullard, 12 Cox, 353, the same 
judge, on the foreman of the grand jury coming into court and asking 
for the deposition of an absent witness, without whose evidence they had 
no material to find the bill, granted the application, without any proof 
that the deposition was admissible as evidence under 11 <fc 12 Vict. c. 42, 
s. 17, observing that the grand jury were not bound by any rules of 
evidence, that they were a secret tribunal, and might lay by the heels in 
gaol the most powerful man in the country by finding a bill against him, 
and for that purpose might even read a paragraph from a newspaper. 
So in B. v. Qerrans, 13 Cox, 158, where it was stated by counsel for the 

Srosecution that a witness was unable to attend the trial through illness, 
>enman, J., permitted his deposition to be presented to the grand jury 
without any preliminary proof that the witness was ill, or that his 
deposition had been regularly taken, and directed that the grand jury 
should be told that the court permitted them to look at the deposition, 
and to act upon it if they thought proper. And in B. v. Lynch (K. B. Z>. 
19, Dec., 1902) Lord Alverstone, L.C. J., allowed the deposition of a witness 
absent through illness to be read before the grand jury without requiring 
to hear evidence as to his condition, stating that such evidence was 
unnecessary. 

Where a witness refuses to give evidence before the grand jury, they 
cannot use his deposition as evidence to enable them to find the bill. 
B. v. Btndle, 11 Cox, 209, Channell, B. 

An improper mode of swearing the witnesses before the grand jury will 
not vitiate the indictment. B. v. Bussell, C. <fc Mar. 247. See O'Conne&l 
v. B., 5 St. Tr., N. S. 1 : 11 CI. & F. 155 ; 8 Eng. Bep. 155. A witness 
who gives false evidence before a grand jury is indictable for perjury (19 
<fc 20 Vict, c 54, 8. 1), and the other witnesses examined on the same bill 



Finding hy CHrand Jury. 101 

are g«xi witnesses to prove it. 22. w. Hughes, \C.&K. 519 ; but a grand 
JTO)r is w>t ail admissible -witness in such a case : Id. ; and 800 2?. t. Marsh, 

If witnesses will not come forward voluntarily to give evidence 
before the grand jury, you may sue out a subpoena or sit&pana duces tecum, 
either at the crown office in Xxmdon, or with the clerk of the arraigns 
in the country, for the assizes, or with the clerk of the peace for 
the sessions, and serve each, of them with a copy, or subpoena ticket, 
m it is termed. Or, if the witness be in prison, he may, if in civil 
custody, be brought up hy hah. corp. ad testificandum, if in criminal 
custody, he may be brought up by an order from a judge, under 16 & 17 
TtdL c 30, s. 9 : and whether iu civil or criminal custody under an order 
of a secretary of state, under s. 11 of the Prison Act, 1898 (61 & 62 Vict. 
c 41). (See Book I., Part J I., chap. ii. sect. 5, par. 6, post.) 

The grand jury have nothing to do with the defence (2 Hale, 157) and 
are not entitled to hear the evidence of tbe defendant, nor of his wit- 
nesses under the Criminal Evidence Act, 1898 (61 & 62 Vict c. 36). R. v. 
Rhodes [1899] 1 Q. B. 77. Nor is it their business to inquire into the 
sanity of the accused, which is for a petty jury to determine : nor have 
they any authority to ignore a bill on the ground of insanity. R. v. 
Hodges, 8 C. <fc P. 195. 

Qualification.'] — Grand jurors must beprobiet legates homines, and ought 
to be of the same county where the crime was committed. A grand juror 
at common law must not be an alien or an outlaw ; he must be returned 
by the proper officer, and not at the instance of the prosecutor. Bacon, 
Ahr. III., Juries A., 725. 

The grand jurors of county sessions of the peace must be qualified 
under s. 1 of the Juries Act, 1825 (6 Geo. 4, c. 50) {post, p. 192). In quarter- 
session boroughs every burgess may be a grand juror unless exempt or 
disqualified (45 <£ 46 Vict. c. 50, s. 186, sub-s. 1). Grand jurors at assizes 
need not be freeholders, Anon. R. & R. 177. British peers are not, but 
an Irish peer, who is a member of the House of Commons, is liable to 
serve upon the grand jury at the assizes. Lord Eeadley's case (1806), 
B, Jt B. 117. No man who has been or shall be attainted of any treason 
or felony, or convicted of any crime that is infamous, unless he shall have 
obtained a free pardon, nor any man who is under outlawry, is or shall 
be qualified to serve on juries or inquests in any court or on any occasion 
whatsoever" 33 <fc 34 Vict. c. Tl % s. 10. Since the abolition of attainder 
(33 4c 34 Vict, c 23, s. 1) and repeal of statutes referring to infamous 
crimes, it is difficult to say whom this 5. disqualifies. But see 24 & 25 
Viet, c 96, «. 46. 

Objections to Grand Jurors.] — In Ireland it has been held that the 
proper mode of objecting to a grand juror is by plea in abatement and not 
by challenge, B. v. Sheridan, 31 St. Tr. 543. In England it is not 
clear that the objection wonld not be taken by way of challenge : 2 Hah, 
155; 2 Hawk. c. 25, s. 16; R. v. Lewis, 7 St. Tr. 250; R. v. Sheares, 27 
St. Tr. 255, 267; 8 Rep. C. L. Commrs., 1841, c. 2, art. 15. It may also 
be taken in arrest of judgment : R. v. Jackson, 25 St. Tr. 885. 

Finding the BUI.] — The bill must be found by a majority of the jurors, 
and that majority must consist of twelve at least ; 2 Bale, 161 ; R. v. 
Ciyncard, Oro. Eliz. 654 ; for which reason it is that the number of persons 
on tbe grand jury by inveterate practice never exceeds twenty- three, nor 
» leas than twelve ; 2 Burr. 1088, n. ; R. v. Marsh, 6 A. & E., 236, 241, 
Denman, L.C.J.; 6 L. J. (M. C.) 153. 



102 Indictment 

The finding must be indorsed on the indictment, and is " parcel of the 
indictment and the perfection of it," and " tonohes it principally, for it is 
the life of it" B. v. Ford, Yelv. 99. And the bill as found most be 
delivered in open court ; 2?. v. Thompson, 1 Cox, 268 ; and it should be 
signed by the foreman ; but absence of the signature is not fatal if the 
bill was delivered by the foreman in open court and read in his presence. 
B. v. Sidoli, 1 I^ewin, 55. 

It is said that the grand jury cannot find billa vera as to part, and 
ignoramus as to the other part of an indictment ; for they ought to find 
the whole or nothing. 2 Hawk. c. 25, s.2: B. v. Ford, Yelv. 99 : B. v. 
Serjant, 1 Sid. 414. Thus ( if upon an indictment for libel, they find 
" quoad the words billa vera" " sed utrum malitiose ignoramus" the finding 
is void. 1 Leon, 287. Bat this has reference only to the same count 
in the indictment : for it is clear that they may find billa vera as to one 
count, and ignoramus to another. B. v. Fieldhouse, 1 Cowp. 325. They 
cannot, however, find the bill conditionally ; as, for instance, " si messu- 
agium sit in possessione domini regis, tunc billa vera." B. v. Lord Crom- 
well, Yelv. 15. Upon an indictment for murder against A. and B., the 
grand jury found billa vera as to A., and as to B., manslaughter only. 
The court, after holding that such a finding was possible, decided that 
the best course was to proceed on the indictment so far as it found 
murder, and to have a new indictment on the manslaughter charge. 
B. v. Carew, 3 Bulstr. 206 ; 1 Bolle Bep. 407. In B. v. Bulb, 4 Cox, 455, 
457, a similar finding was on the authority of the case above cited, and 

1 Chit. Cr. L. 322, treated as good for the murder and nugatory as to the 
manslaughter. And they may find billa vera as to A., and ignoramus as 
to B.; B. v. Cholmley, Cro. Car. 464; or they may find bills against 
one or both of them for manslaughter, although, in such a case, it is 
more usual for the grand jury to return the indictment to the court, 
with a desire that it may be altered to a bill for manslaughter, and, when 
so altered (which may readily be done), to find a true bill generally. 
Upon an indictment for murder, however, the jury even under the old 
law could not find billa vera se defendendo. B. v. Powle, 2 Bolle Bep. 52. 
Nor can they do so now, as such a finding would be practically a finding 
of no offence. See 24 <fc 25 Vict. c. 100, s. 7. 

Since 5 & 6 Vict. c. 38 (post, p. 126) the grand jurors of the sessions can 
find bills which the cessions have no Jurisdiction to try. B. v. Allum, 

2 Cox, 62, Parke, B. ; B. v. Atkinson, 1 'Wms. Saund. (6th ed.) 249, note 1. 
Prior to that Act the contrary was held. B. v. Bigby [1839] 8 C. <ft P., 
770 : B. v. Bainton, 2 Str. 1088. Where such a bill is found the proper 
course is to transmit it to the assizes for trial, or for the judge of assize 
to remove it to his court by certiorari under 5 <fc 6 Vict c. 38, *. 2 (see 
post, p. 129). See B. v. Wildman, 12 Cox, 354; Keating, J. For form 
of order to transmit, see Archbold, Q. S. (5th ed.) 238 ; Pritchard, Q. S. 
(2nd ed.). 

Indictments found at the sessions, and transmitted by the justices to 
the assizes, must be tried at the assizes, although they be not removed 
by certiorari. B. v. Wetherell^ B. & B. 381. The power of the justices at 
quarter sessions to remit indictments found there for trial at the assizes 
is not affected by 52 <fe 53 Vict. c. 12 (Assizes Belief Act, 1889) : see s. 5>of 
that statute. Such transmission is, however, a matter in the discretion 
of the justices, and the judge of assize has no power to order it, even 
although the defendant may, after the finding of the indictment at 
sessions, have been bound by recognizance to appear and plead to it at 
the assizes. R. v. Wildman, ubi supra. 

Although the grand jury have been formally discharged, yet if they 



Process to compel Appearance. 103 

have not teffc the precincts of the court, nor separated, they may be 
recalled and charged with other bills. R. v. Hdloway, 9 C.& P. 43. 

If a bill is thrown out, it can be preferred to the same grand jury 
during the same assizes or sessions. R. v. Simmonite, 1 Cox, 30, Wight- 
man, J. : R. v. Newton, 2 M. &. Rob. 503, Wightman, J. There are, how- 
ever, authorities to the contrary; R. v. Humphreys, C. & Mar. 601, 
Patteson, J. : R. v. Austin, 4 Cox, 385; and it is not proper to do so unless 
new evidence is available. A fresh bill may, however, be preferred and 
found at the next assizes or sessions if no time be limited for preferring 
it, or if the time have not elapsed. It is usual to detain a prisoner a bill 
against whom is ignored until the grand jury are discharged to see 
whether any other bill will be sent up and found against him. See R. v. 
Simmon ite, ubi supra. 

The grand jury are not liable to action or prosecution for anything 
done by them with reference to finding a bill of indictment. Flot/d v. 
Barker, 12 Co. Rep. 23 : Earl of Macclesfield v. Starkey, 10 St. Tr., 1329, 
1413. 

And evidence by grand jurors as to what passed in the grand jury room 
will not be received. R. v. Marsh, SA.&E. 236, 237. 



Sect. 9. 

process, after indictment found, to compel appeabanoe of 

the accused. 

Proceedings by writ.'] — If a defendant against whom an indictment has 
been found is present in court, or in the custody of the court, he may at 
once be arraigned upon the indictment, without any previous process. 
2 Hawk, c 27 ; 1 Chit. Cr. L. 338. Where the defendant is in the custody 
of another court, the court is to remove him by habeas corpus ad respon- 
dendum, and bring him up to plead. " Where recognizances shall have 
been entered into for the appearance of any person to take his trial for 
any offence at any court of criminal jurisdiction, and a bill of indictment 
shall be found against him, and such person shall be then in the prison 
belonging to the jurisdiction of such court, under warrant of commit- 
ment, or under sentence for some other offence, it shall be lawful for 
the court, by order in writing, to direct the governor of the said prison 
to bring up the body of such person, in order that he may be arraigned 
upon such indictment without writ of habeas corpus, and the said governor 
shall thereupon obey such order." 30 & 31 Vict. c. 35, s. 10. The attend- 
ance of the prisoner can also, it would seem, be obtained under a secretary 
of state's order. 61 & 62 Vict. c. 41, s. 11. Where a prisoner after his 
committal for trial, but before trial had been removed to a lunatic asylum 
by warrant from the secretary of state, under 27 & 28 Vict. c. 29 (rep.), 
whether he is or is not under recognizance to appear he could be brought 
up for trial by a habeas corpus issued by the judge of assize. R. v. Peacock, 
12 Cox, 21, Brett, J. But it is doubtful whether this power exists in the 
case of a warrant of the secretary of state, issued under s. 2 of the Criminal 
Lunatics Act, 1884 (47 & 48 Vict. c. 64). See Ex parte Collins (Q. B. D. 
Feb. 16, 1899) ; ML. J. Newsp., 132 ; 43 Sol. Journ. 280. 

When an indictment for a misdemeanor has been fonnd, a writ of venire 
facias ad respondendum may be issued either by the King's Bench Division, 
a judge of assize, or a court of quarter sessions. Com. Dig. Process, A. I; 
5 Edw. 3, c. 11. On default in appearance a writ of distringas may be 
issued. 



104 Indictment. 

In the case of indictments in the High Court against the inhabitants of 
a county, parish, or district, or against a corporation aggregate, writs of 
venire facias and distringas are issued to compel appearance. Or. Off. 
Bides, 1886, r. 98. When the indictment is found in or removed to the 
High Court, the proper procedure in the case of defendants not parties to 
the removal, nor bound by recognizances to answer, is by issue of a writ 
of venire facias, or in the case of an information to issue a subpoena to 
answer, or venire facias: r. 94. If the defendant does not appear within 
four days of the return day specified in a subpoena he may be attached ; r. 
95. If he does not appear within four days of a return by the sheriff to 
a venire facias the prosecutor may issue a writ of distringas : r. 96. And 
if default in appearance is made after execution of the distringas the 
prosecutor may sue out a capias ad respondendum : r. 98. 

The form of a writ of venire facias is as follows : — 

Edward, etc., to the sheriff of , greeting. We command you that you 

cause to come before us in [the King's Bench Division of our High Court 

of Justice at the Royal Courts of Justice, London] on the day of , 

A. B. to answer to us for certain misdemeanors whereof he is indicted : and 
have you there then this writ. Or. Off. Mules, 1886,/orm 52). Witness, etc 

This writ was issued by . 

The form of a distringas is as follows : — 

Edward, etc, to the sheriff of the county of , greeting. We command 

you that you omit not by reason of any liberty in your bailiwick, but that you 

enter the same, and distrain A. B., of , in your county [yeoman], by all 

his lands and tenements, etc., and that you answer for the issues thereof, etc ; 
and that you have his body before our justices assigned to keep our peace, and 
also to hear and determine divers felonies, trespasses and other misdemeanors 

in the said county committed, at in your said county, on the ~ day 

of next ensuing, to answer unto us concerning divers trespasses, con- 
tempts and offences of which he is indicted [or, to answer unto us, upon certain 
articles presented against him the said A. B.] and have you there then this 

writ. Witness C. D. and E. F. [two justices of the peace] at , the 

day of , in the year of our reign. 

If the defendant appears to the writ of distringas, a supersedeas may be 
obtained, either to stay the execution of the writ, or to procure a return 
of the amount levied. Or. Off. Rules, 1886, r. 115, and form 171 : Bac. 
Abr. tit. Attorney, B. But if tbe defendant fails to appear within the 
time limited, and the sheriff makes a return that he has no lands, a writ 
of capias ad respondendum may be issued, and if he cannot be taken upon 
the first capias, second and third writs of capias called alias and jrfurte*, 
may issue. 4 Bl. Com. 389 : as to the duties and power of the sheriff 
see Bengough v. Bossiter, 4 T. B. 506 ; 2 H. Bl. 419. B. v. Yandell, 4 
T. B. 521. Upon an indictment for felony a writ of capias is issued in the 
first instance ; but this mode of proceeding is now rarely adopted, except 
as a step towards outlawry. See post, p. 109. 

The following is the form of the writ of capias : — 

Edward, etc., to the sheriff of the county of , greeting. We command 

you that you omit not by reason of any liberty in your bailiwick, but that you 

enter the same, and take A. B., of ,in your county [labourer], if he 

should be found in your bailiwick, and him cause to be safely kept, so that 
you have his body before our justices assigned to keep our peace, and also to 



Process to compel Appearance, 105 

hear and determine divers felonies, trespasses and other misdemeanors in the 

said county committed at in your county, on the day of next 

ensuing, to answer unto us concerning divers trespasses, contempts, and of 
which he is indicted, and have you there then this writ. Witness C. D. and 

E. F. [two justices of the peace] at , the day of , in the 

year of our reign. 

If the proceedings above fail the prosecutor can proceed to outlawry, 
post, p. 109. 

Proceeding by warrant of a justice."] — Proceedings in ordinary cases are 
regulated by s. 3 of the Indictable Offences Act, 1848 (11 & 12 Vict, c 42), 
by which it is provided that "where any indictment shall be found 
by the grand jury in any court of oyer and terminer or general gaol 
delivery, or in any court of general or quarter sessions of the peace, 
against any person who shall then be at large, and whether such person 
shall have been bound by any recognizance to appear to answer to the 
same or not, the person who shall act as clerk of the indictments at such 
court of oyer and terminer or gaol delivery, or as clerk of the peace at 
such sessions at which the said indictment shall be found, shall at any 
time afterwards, after the end of the sessions of oyer and terminer or 
gaol delivery or sessions of the peace at which such indictment shall 
have been found, upon application of the prosecutor, or of any person 
on his behalf, and on payment of a fee of one shilling, if such person 
shall not have already appeared and pleaded to such indictment, grant 
unto such prosecutor or person a certificate (infra) of suoh indictment 
having been found ; and upon production of such certificate to any justice 
or justices of the peace for any county, riding, division, liberty, city, 
borough, or place in which the offence shall in such indictment be alleged 
to have been committed, or in which the person indicted in and by such 
indictment shall reside or be, or be supposed or suspected to reside or be, 
it shall be lawful for such justice or justices, and he and they are hereby 
required to issue his or their warrant (see infra) to apprehend such person 
so indicted, and to cause him to be brought before such justice or justices, 
or any other justice or justices for the same county, riding, division, 
liberty, city, borough, or place, to be dealt with according to law ; and 
afterwards, if such person be thereupon apprehended and brought before 
any such justice or justices, such justice or justices, upon its being proved 
upon oath or affirmation before him or them that the person so appre- 
hended is the same person who is charged and named in such indictment 
shall, without further inquiry or examination, commit (see infra) him for 
trial, or admit him to bail, in manner hereinafter mentioned. . . ." (See 
Ball, post, p. 110). 
The forms scheduled to the Indictable Offences Act, 1848, are as follows :— 

(F) 

Form of certificate of indictment being found.] — / hereby certify that 

• at [a court of oyer and terminer and general gaol delivery, or a court of 

general quarter sessions of the peace], holden in and for the [county] 

of , at , in the said [county], on a bill of indictment was 

found by the grand jury against A. £., therein described as A. B., late 

of [labourer], for that he [etc., stating shortly the offence], and 

that the said A, B. hath not appeared or pleaded to the said indictment 

Dated this day of , 190 . 

J. D., clerk of the indictments on the circuit, [or 

clerk of the peace of and for the said [county] ]. 



106 Indictment. 



(G) 



Form of warrant to apprehend a person indicted.] — To] the constable 

of , and to all other peace officers in the said [county] of . 

Whereas it hath been duly certified by J. D., clerk of the indictments on 

the circuit [or clerk of the peace of and for the [county] of ] 

[that, etc., stating the certificate]: These are therefore to command you, 
in his Majesty's name, forthwith to apprehend the said A. B. f and to 
bring him before [mel, or some other justice or justices of the peace in and 
for the said [county], to be dealt with according to law. Given under my 

hand and seed this day of , in the year of our Lord , at 

, in the [county] aforesaid. 

J. S. (l.b.) 

(H) 

Form of warrant of commitment of a person indicted, ,] — To the constable 

of , and to the keeper of the [common gaol or house of correction], 

at , in the said [county] of . Whereas by [my] warrant under 

[my] hand and seal, dated the day of , after reciting that it 

had been certified by J. J), [etc., as in the certificate], [/] commanded &e 

constable of and all other peace officers of the said county, in his 

Majesty's name, forthwith to apprehend the said A. B. f and to bring him before 
[me], the undersigned, [one] of his Majesty's justices of the peace in and for 
the said [county] ; or before some other justice or justices of the peace in and 
for the said [county], to be dealt with according to law : and whereas the said 
A. B. hath been apprehended under and by virtue of the said warrant, and 
being now brought before [me], it is hereupon duly proved to [me] upon oath 
that the said A. B. is the same person who is named and charged in and by 
the said indictment : These are therefore to command you, the said constable, 
in his Majesty's name forthwith to take and safely convey the said A. B. to the 

said [house of correction] at in the said [county], and there to deliver 

him to the keeper thereof, together with this precept ; and I hereby command you 
the said keeper to receive the said A. B. into your custody in the said house of 
correction, and him there safely to keep until he shall be thence delivered by 

due course of law. Given under my hand and seal this day of , in 

the year of our Lord , at , in the [county] aforesaid. 

J. S. (L.8.) 

Backing justice's warrants.] — If the person against whom a justice's 
warrant has been issued with respect to an indictable offence has escaped 
or gone into, or resides, or is supposed to reside or be " in any place in 
England or Wales, out of the jurisdiction of the justice issuing such 
warrant," upon proof alone being made on oath of the handwriting of the 
justice issuing such warrant, it is lawful for any justice of the peace for 
the county or place in which the person against whom the warrant has 
been issued is, or is supposed to be, to indorse the warrant in the following 
form ; and such indorsement shall be sufficient authority for the execution 
of the warrant in that county or place. 11 & 12 Vict. c. 42, s. 11. An 
arrest under a warrant not backed by a justice of the county or borough 
within which it is executed is illegal. H. v. Cumpton, 5 Q. B. D. 841 ; 49 
L. J. (M. C.) 41. A warrant issued by a Metropolitan Police Magistrate 
in respect of an offence committed within the Metropolitan Police District 
may be executed outside that district without backing by any of the con- 
stables to whom it is directed. 2 <fc 3 Vict. c. 71, s. 17. 

Under 11 & 12 Vict. c. 42, ss. 12, 13, 14, English warrants may be backed 



Process to compel Appearance. 107 

in Ireland, Scotland, or the Isles of Man, Guernsey, Jersey, Alderney or 
Bark. English warrants may also be executed in Ireland, after endorse- 
ment by the inspector-general or a deputy or assistant inspector of the 
Irish Constabulary, under 14 & 15 Vict. c. 93, s. 29, and 30 £ 31 Vict. c. 
19, *. 1. 
The form of indorsement used is as follows : — 



[ to wit : Whereas proof upon oath hath this day been made be/ore me, 

one of his Majesty's justices of the peace for the said [county] of , that 

the name of J. S. to the within warrant subscribed is of the handwriting of the 
justice of the peace within mentioned : I do therefore hereby authorize W. T., 
tc&o bringeth to me this warrant, and all other persons to whom this warrant 
teas originally directed, or by whom it may lawfully be executed, and also all 

constables and other peace officers of the said [county] of , to execute the 

same within the said last-mentioned [county], and to bring the said A. B., 
if apprehended within the same [county], before me [or before some othtr 
justice or justices of the peace of the same county], to be dealt with according 

to law. Given under my hand this day of , 190 . 

J. L. 

Offenders fleeing from the United Kingdom."] — Where the offender has 
fled to a British possession or a place to which the Foreign Jurisdiction 
Ads apply, the warrants for his arrest are executed under the Fugitive 
Offenders Act, 1881 (44 & 45 Vict, c 69). 

Where the accused has fled to a foreign country to which the Foreign 
Jurisdiction Acts do not apply, his surrender is obtainable under the Extra- 
dition Treaty in force with such country, or in some cases by application to 
the foreign government, independently of any treaty. The procedure to 
be followed depends on the terms of the treaty or the requirements of the 
foreign government. See Clarke on Extradition (4th ed.); Biron and 
Chalmers on Extradition. For the text of the treaties see Statutory Rules 
and Orders (ed. 1904), vol. 5, tit. u Fugitive Criminals The Extradition Acts 
of 1870, 1873, and 1895, in the main regulate only procedure for extradition 
from British dominions, but they forbid the trial of fugitives surrendered 
by foreign states, except on charges founded on the facts on which their 
surrender was made. 

When the defendant is already in prison.'}— If the person against whom 
the indictment has been found is " confined in any gaol or prison for any 
other offence than that charged in the said indictment, at the time of such 
application and production of the said certificate to such justice or 
justices as aforesaid (ante, p. 105), it shall be lawful for such justice or 
justices, and he and they are hereby required, upon it being proved before 
him or them upon oath or affirmation that the person so indicted and the 
person so confined in prison are one and the same person, to issue his or 
their warrant (see post, 108), directed to the gaoler or keeper of the gaol 
or prison in which the person so indicted shall then be confined as afore- 
said, commanding him to detain such person in custody until by his 
Majesty's writ of habeas corpus he shall be removed therefrom, for the 
purpose of being tried upon the said indictment, or until he shall other- 
wise be removed or discharged out of his custody by due course of law." 
11 Jt 12 Vict, c 42, *. 3. 



i* 



108 Indictment. 



(I.) 



Form of warrant to detain a person indicted who is already in custody for 
another offence."] — To the keeper of the [common gaol or house of correction], 

at , in the said [county J of : Whereas it hath been duly certified by 

J. D., clerk of the indictments on the circuit [or clerk of the peace of and 

for the county of ], that [etc,, stating the certificate] : And whereas [I am] 

informed that the said A. B. is in your custody in the said [common gaol] at 

aforesaid, charged with some offence or other matter; and it being now 

duly proved, upon oath before [me] that the said A. £. so indicted as aforesaid 
and the said A. B. in your custody as aforesaid are one and the same person ; 
These are therefore to command you, in his Majesty's name, to detain the said 
A. B. in your custody in the [common gaol] aforesaid, until by his Majesty's 
writ of habeas corpus he shall be removed therefrom for the purpose of being tried 
upon the said indictment or until he shall otherwise be removed or discharged 
out of your custody by due course of law. Given under my hand and seal 

this day of , in the year of our Lord , at , in the [county] 

aforesaid. 

J. S. (la) 

Proceeding by bench warrant.] —By a long course of practice, it is an 
established rule that any court before which an indictment is found may 
forthwith issue a bench warrant for arresting the party charged, and 
bringing him immediately before such court, to answer such indictment. 
8 Rep. Crim. Com. L. 99 ; Dick. Sees. 230 (6th ed.) ; and see 5 Ed. 3, c. 11 ; 
34 Ed. 3, c. 1 ; Cro. Cir. Comp. 15 (10th ed.) ; 1 Chitty, Or. L. 340 ; 
Archbold Q. S. (5th ed.) 99 ; Pritchard, Q. S. (2nd ed.) 194. In 3 Bum's 
J., tit. "Process," 1338 (30th ed.), it is said that the practice refers only to 
cases of misdemeanor. If the warrant is issued at the assizes, it is signed 
by a judge : if at sessions, by two justices of the peace. Hawkins, bk. 2, 
c. 27, s. 8, says that the warrant is granted when the court is sitting. 
This statement applies to commissions of the peace, and is only another 
way of saying that the court is not continuous, and the act must be 
done in sessions. Where the party against whom the indictment has 
been found is already under recognizance to appear and answer any 
indictment that may be preferred against him, and he does not appear, 
the prosecutor may bespeak a bench warrant, which will be signed by the 
justices at the close of the sessions ; for the sessions being in law but one 
day, the defendant has the whole period of the sessions to appear. 2 Salk. 
607; Cro. Cir. Comp. 15 (10th ed.). When a prosecutor applies for a 
bench warrant at the Central Criminal Court, a recognizance to prosecute 
with effect against the defendant is required. Beg. Gen., Jan. 1847; Car. 
<ft M. 254. It is said that at that court the warrant is only current for 
the session in which it is issued. Archbold, Q. S. (5th ed.) 99. See B. v. 
Nichols, 64 J. P. 217, Fulton, Recorder. This opinion probably rests on 
the theory that the court is not a continuing court, which was held to be 
erroneous by Wright, J.*, in B. v. Madge & Armstrong, Q. B. D., May 8, 
1894, 29 Law. Jour. Newsp. 301, and Times, May 9, 1894, Wright and 
Collins, JJ., cited B. v. Parke (1903), 2 K. B. at 440. It is not now the 
practice to grant a bench warrant unless immediate arrest is necessary, 
or it is shown that the party charged was about to quit the country; R. v. 
Whittaker 2, F. & F.l ; and it is not granted for the arrest of defaulting 
witnesses. B. v. Crawford, 6 Cox } 481 (Jr.). 

The following is the form of a bench warrant : — 



Bench Warrants. 109 

County of London."] — To all constables, headboroughs, and other his 
Majesty's officers and ministers within the county of London, and to every 
one of them whom it may concern : These are to will and require, and in his 
Majesty's name to charge and command you, upon sight hereof, to bring 
before us his Majesty's justices of the peace for the county aforesaid, at the 
sessions of the peace [or general quarter sessions of the peace] now holden at 
the Sessions Mouse on ClerkenweU Oreen, in and for the said county, the body 
of A. B., who stands indicted before us at this same session for a trespass and 
assault [nature of the offence], if the court be then and there sitting \ or if 
not, before us or some other of his Majesty } s justices of the peace for the same 
county, to find sufficient sureties for his personal appearance at this present 
sessions, to answer the said indictment and all such other matters as on his 
Majesty's behalf shall be objected against him ; and if he cannot be taken 
during this present session, that then, as soon after as he shall be taken, you 
bring or cause him to be brought before us or some other of his Majesty's 
justices of the peace of the said county to find sufficient sureties : that is to say, 

two sureties in £ each for his personal appearance at the next session of 

the peace to be holden for the said county, to answer as aforesaid, and farther 
to be dealt with according to law. Hereof you are not to fail at your peril. 
Dated in open session at the Sessions House, ClerkenweU Green, aforesaid, 

this day of , in the year of our Lord . 

C. D. and E. P. 

Warrant by judge of the High Court.]— Under 48 G. 3. c. 58, s. 1, any 
judge of the King's Bench Division of the High Court of Justice upon 
affidavit or certificate of the fact (2?. v. Bedfem, 2 A. & E. 387) that an 
indictment has been found, or information filed in that court, against any 
person for an offence other than treason or felony, may issue his warrant 
for apprehending him and taking him before a judge of the High Court 
or a justice of the peace, to be by him held to bail with two sufficient 
sureties as the court specified in the warrant for appearance in the King's 
Bench Division at the time mentioned in the warrant to answer the 
indictment or information ; and if such defendant neglects or refuses to 
provide bail, the judge or justice before whom he is brought may 
commit him to prison. After the termination of the assizes or sessions of 
the peace, upon a certificate from the clerk of assize, or the clerk of the 
peace (see form, ante, p. 105), a judge of the King's Bench Division, or a 
justice of the county in which the indictment has been found, may, by 
warrant under his hand, cause the party indicted to be arrested, and, in 
default of bail, commit him for trial. B. v. Downey, 17 Q. B. 281 ; 15 L. J. 
(Jf. C) 29 ; 4 Bl. Com. 319. The statute does not preclude the use of a 
capias ad respondendum (ss. 1, 8), but that is now only needed as a step to 
outlawry. Jror form of warrant, see Short & Mellor, Crown Office Practice, 
p. 607 {No. 44) ; 8 Bep. Crim. L. 348. 

As to process on coroners' inquisitions, see post, p. 159. 

Outlawry.]— Where an indictment for treason, felony, or misdemeanor 
has been found by a grand jury against any person, whether a peer or a 
commoner, and summary process proves ineffectual to the apprehension 
of the defendant, process of outlawry is issued : — outlawry being a 
punishment inflicted upon an offender by the law for contumacy, in 
refusing to render himself amenable to the justice of the King's courts, (a) 
Bod. <fc Stud. dial. 2, cap. 3 ; Bac. Abr. Outlawry ; Com. Dig., Utlagary ; 
1 Chitty, Crim. L. 347; 2 Hale, 194; 2 Hawk, a 27, s. 113. An outlawry 

(a) As to New South Wales law of outlawry, see R. v. Jemmy Governor [19001 
21 A\ S. W. R. (Law), 27& 



110 Indictment. 

in treason or felony still amounts to a conviction and attainder of the 
offence charged in the indictment, as much as if the offender had been 
found guilty by a jury ; 4 Bl. Com. 319; 2 Hawk. c. 48, ss. 21-26 ; 33 <fe 
34 Vict. c. 23, *. 1 ; but outlawry, in a case of misdemeanor, does not enure 
as a conviction for the offence, but merely as a conviction of the contempt 
for not answering. R. v. Tippin, 2 Salk. 494. Process of outlawry may 
be awarded by justices of oyer and terminer, and also by justices of the 
peace at quarter sessions, on indictments taken before them ; 3 Burn's J., 
Process, 1339 (30th ed.) ; Dick. Q. Sess. 228 (6th ed.) ; but the practice of 
proceeding to outlawry in courts of quarter sessions seems to have become 
obsolete : 8 Hep. Crim. L. 103 ; and the usual course is to remove the 
indictment found at sessions by certiorari, and proceed to outlawry in the 
King's Bench Division. The most scrupulous exactness is required in all 
the proceedings in outlawry, which may be set aside on writ of error for 
any informality. 1 Chitty, Crim. L. 317. Although outlawry is still an 
integral, and has been described as an essential part of the criminal law 
(R. v. Wilkes, 4 Burr. 2527, 2551, Lord Mansfield, C.J.), proceedings in 
outlawry are exceedingly rare, and may almost be said to be extinct 
Mart & Mellor, Crown Office Practice, 384. It is therefore sufficient to 
refer to that work, which contains a full account of the proceedings in 
outlawry, and to the Crown Office Rules, 1886, rr. 99-121, which now 
regulate the practice in outlawry and reversal of outlawry, when the 
proceedings are in tbe King's Bench Division. Under s. 1, subs. 2, of the 
Statute Jjaw Revision Act, 1888 (51 Vict. c. 3), the Lord Chancellor may, if 
he thinks fit, by order extend the Grown Office Rules in force for the time 
being, as to proceedings in outlawry, to proceedings in outlawry in courts 
of assize, oyer and terminer, and gaol delivery, and in other courts in 
England, with such modifications as to him may seem expedient, and as 
from the date of the order the old statutes as to outlawry scheduled to 
that Act are to be repealed. No order had up to the end of 1904 been 
made by the Lord Chancellor, and the old statutes remain in force as 
to the courts last named. 



Sect 10. 

BAIL. 

Nature of bail.]— Bail are sureties taken by a person duly authorized, 
for appearance at a certain day and place, to answer and be justified by 
law. Hale's Sum. 96 ; Dolt. c. 166, pt. 2. The defendant is placed in the 
custody of his bail ; who may re-seize him (1 Hale, 124; Bolton, c. 166, 
pt. 2) if they have reason to suppose that he is about to fly, and bring 
him before a justice, who will commit the prisoner in discharge of the 
bail ; R. v. Butcher, Peake, 226 (3rd ed.) : 3 R. R. 678 ; and any attempt 
to rescue him from their custody is illegal. Id. 

When granted.] — Bail in treason or felony is discretionary in the High. 
Court or courts having jurisdiction to try the offence. R. v. McCariie^ 
[1859] 11 Ir. C. L. R. 188, 192 : R. v. Piatt, 1 Leach, 157. Bail in mis- 
demeanor is said to be of right at common law. R. v. Spilsburg [18981 
2 Q. B. 615, 623: R. v. Badger, 4 Q. B. 468, 472; 12 L. J. (M. C.) 66 ; 
4 St. Tr., N. S. 1387 : Re Frost, 4 T. L. R. 757, Coleridge, L.C.J. ; and 
see 31 Car. 2, c. 2 : 2 Hawk. c. 15, ss. 7, 13, 16. Refusal or delay by any 
judge or magistrate to bail any person bailable is by the common law au 
offence against the liberty of the subject. 4 Bl. Com. 297. It is also 



Bail. 111 

a violation of the Habeas Corpus Act, 1679 (31 Oar. 2, c. 2) and of the 
BUI of Rights (1 Will. & M., Sess. 2, c. 2). Bat tbe duty of a magistrate 
in respect of admitting a prisoner to bail is judicial, and not merely 
ministerial, and therefore an action will not lie against him without 
proof of malice for refusing to admit to bail a person charged with a 
misdemeanor, entitled to be admitted to bail. Linford v. Fitzroy, 13 
Q. B. 240; 18 L. J. (M. C.)108: R. v. Badger, 4 Q. B. 468 ; 12 L.J.(M. C.) 
66 : Osborne v. Oough, 3 B. & P. 551. See Bac. Abr. t Bail ; Com. Dig. 
Bail, F. 5, K. 6. 

Bail is not to be withheld merely as a punishment. The requirements 
as to bail are merely to secure the attendance of the accused at the trial. 
R. v. Rose, 67 L. J. (Q. B.) 289 : 17 Cox, 717 (0. C. R.). 

The proper test of whether bail should be granted or refused is whether 
it is probable that the party will appear to take his trial. Re Robinson, 
23 L. J. (Q. B.) 286 ; i?..v. Scai/e, 10 L. J. (M. C.) 144 ; 9 Dowl, Fr. Cos. 553. 

The test should be applied by reference to the following con- 
siderations : 

(1) The nature of the accusation. R. v. Barronet, 1 E. <fc B. 1 ; 22 L. J. 

(M. C.) 25 : Dears. 51 : R. v. Butler [1881] 8 L. R. Ir. 39 : 
14 Cox, 530. 

(2) The nature of the evidence in support of the accusation. Re 

Robinson (ubi supra) ; R. v. Butler (ubi supra) : R. v. McGormick, 
[1864] 17 Ir. C. L. R. 411. 

(3) The severity of the punishment which conviction will entail. 

Re Robinson (ubi supra). The character or behaviour of the 
accused is said to be irrelevant (Id.) 

(4) Whether the sureties are independent, or indemnified by the 

accused. See R. v. Butler, 8 L. R. Ir. 39 ; 14 Cox, 530 : Hermann 
v. Jeuchner, 15 Q. B. D. 561; 54 L. J. (Q. B.) 340; Consolidated 
Exploration, &c, Co. v. Musgraoe [1900] 1 6^. 37 ; 64 J. P. 89 : 
contra, R. v. Broome, 18 L. T., 0. S. 19, Martin, B., fallowed by 
Fulton, Recorder, in R. v. StockweU [1902] 66 J. P. 376. 
It is not usual to grant bail on charges of murder; Re Barthelemy, 
1 E. & B. 8 ; Dears. 60 ; or after indictment found ; R. v. Cfiapman, 
8 C. & P. 558 {and see post, p. 115), except where the trial is adjourned. 
Anon. 2 Lewin, 250. As to the proper mode of taking a recognizance at 
quarter sessions, see ex parte Jeffreys, 52 J. P. 280. As to bail in the High 
Court, see post, p. 116. If insufficient bail has been taken, or if the 
sureties become afterwards insufficient, the accused may be ordered by 
any magistrate to find sufficient sureties, and in default may be com- 
mitted to prison ; and the justice who admitted a defendant to bail 
upon insufficient securities is responsible if the defendant does not appear. 
Hales Sum. 97. 

Who may be bail.]— The bail must be of ability sufficient to answer 
for the sum in which they are bound. 2 Hawk. c. 15, s. 4. They are 
usually householders ; but it is for the magistrate or judge to act upon 
his discretion as to the sufficiency of the bail; R. v. Saunders, 2 Cox, 
249 ; 1 Burn's J., Bail, 373 (30th ed.) ; 1 Chitty, Crim. L. 99 ; and the 
proposed bail may be examined upon oath as to his means, though in 
criminal cases no justification of bail is requisite. R. v. Hall, 2 W. Bl. 
1110; Tidtf* Prac. 250; 1 Chitty, Crim. L. 100. And the court or 
magistrate may, at discretion, order that reasonable notice shall be given 
to the prosecutor and the police, to enable him or them to inquire or 
object as to the sufficiency of the bail. No person convicted of any crime 
by which he has become infamous was allowed to be surety for any person 



112 Indictment, 

charged or suspected of an indictable offence. B. v. Edvoards, 4 T. B. 
440; 2 B. B. 427. It is not expedient to accept the solicitor of the 
accused as bail for his client, B. v. Scott- Jarvis (Q. B. D., Times, 20iA 
Nov., 1876): Douglas, Summary Jurisdiction Procedure (8th ed.) 371. 
Nor is a person who has been indemnified by the accused; supra (3). 
Persons in custody cannot be bail. Infants cannot be bail ; nor could 
a married woman at common law; but since the Married Women's 
Property Act, 1882, married women haying separate estate are accepted 
as bail. Personation of bail is a felony under 24 & 25 Vict c. 98, *. 34. 

Where persons who have become bail for any defendant discharge 
themselves by taking and surrendering him before the court or magistrate 
by whom he has been bailed, it is competent for the defendant to find 
new sureties. 2 Hale, 124; Hawk. c. 15, s. 3. 

Bail by justices of the peace: when discretionary.] — "Where any person 
shall appear or be brought before a justice of the peace charged with any 
felony, or with any assault with intent to commit any felony, or with any 
attempt to commit any felony, or with obtaining or attempting to obtain 
property by false pretences, or with a misdemeanor in receiving property 
stolen or obtained by false pretences, or with perjury or subornation of 
perjury, or with concealing the birth of a child by secret burying or 
otherwise, or with wilful or indecent exposure of the person, or with riot, 
or with assault in pursuance of a conspiracy to raise wages, or assault 
upon a peace officer in the execution of his duty, or upon any person 
acting in his aid, or with neglect or breach of duty as a peace officer, or 
with any misdemeanor for the prosecution of which the costs may be 
allowed out of the county rate." [For a list of these offences, see post, ch. v/., 
p. 247: they seem to include comnv/n assault. B.Y. Waldron, 18 Cox, 373.] 
" Such justice of the peace may, in his discretion, admit such person to bail, 
upon his procuring and producing such surety or sureties as in the 
opinion of such justice will be sufficient to ensure the appearance of such 
accused person at the time and place when and where he is to be tried 
for such offence ; and thereupon such justice shall take the recognizance 
(see infra) of the said accused person and his surety or sureties, con- 
ditioned for the appearance of such accused person at the time and place 
of trial, and that he will then surrender and take his trial, and not depart 
the court without leave." 11 & 12 Vict. c. 42, s. 23; and see 1 Chitty, 
Crim. L. 95 ; 4 Bl. Com. 298 : Linford v. Fitzroy, 13 Q. B. 240 ; 18 L. J. 
(M. C.) 108: B. v. Bose, 67 L. J. (Q. B.) 289; 18 Cox, 717: and Short 
& Mellor, Or. Off. Practice, pp. 374, et seq. 

When compulsory.'] — " Where any person shall be charged before any 
justice of the peace with any indictable misdemeanor other than those 
hereinbefore mentioned, such justice, after taking the examinations in 
writing as aforesaid, instead of committing him to prison for such offence, 
shall admit him to bail in manner aforesaid, or if he have been committed 
to prison and shall apply to any one of the visiting justices of such prison 
or to any other justice of the peace for the same county, riding, division, 
liberty, city, borough or place, before the first day of the sitting or session 
at which he is to be tried, or before the day to which such sitting or 
session may be adjourned, to be admitted to bail, such justice shall 
accordingly admit him to bail in manner aforesaid." 11 & 12 Vict. c. 42, s. 
23 ; and see 2 Bale, 127 ; 4 Bl. Com. 298 ; Bum's J. (30th ed.), Bail ; 1 Chitty, 
Crim. L. 97 ; and remarks of Lord Denman, Linford v. Fitzroy, supra. 

Under the Bail Act, 1898 (61 & 62 Vict. c. 7, s. 1), " where a justice has 
power under s. 23 of the Indictable Offences Act, 1848 (11 & 12 Vict. c. 42), 



Bail by Justice** US 

to admit td bail for appearance, he may dispense with sureties, if it is his 
opinion the so dispensing will not tend to defeat the ends of justice ; " 
and it is his duty to admit to bail in all cases where there is a reasonable 
belief that the accused will attend to take his trial. 

Wlten forbidden.]—" No justice or justices of the peaco shall admit any 
person to bail for treason, nor shall snch person be admitted to bail, 
except by order of one of his Majesty's secretaries of state, or by the 
High Court of Justice (King's Bench Division), or a judge thoreof in 
vacation. 11 cfc 12 Vict. c. 42, s. 23; 35 & 37 Vict. c. 66, ss. 16, 34 ; 38 <fe 
39 Vict, c 77, s. 19. 

Bail on remand.]— II <fc 12 Vict. c. 42, s. 23, applies only where the 
accused is committed for trial : and does not apply to bail on remand. 
There is some difference of opinion as to the power of the High Court 
to interfere where justices have refused bail on remand. See Douglas, 
8ummary Jurisdiction Procedure (8th ed.) f pp. 371, 372: but in J?, v. 
Beafl (Q.B.D., July, 1899), Channell, J., said tbat if the power existed the 
Court would be very slow to interfere with the justices' decision. 

Form of recognizance of bail taken by a justice of the peace.] — The follow- 
ing is the form of the recognizance to be entered into by bail before a 
justice of the peace, prescribed by 11 <fc 12 Vict. c. 42 :— 

(SI.) 

Be it remembered, that on the day of , in the year of our Lord 

, A. B. of [labourer], L. M. of [grocer], and N. 0. of 



^butcher], personally came before [us] the undersigned, two of his Majesty's 
justices of the peace for the said [county], and severally acknowledged them* 
selves to owe to our lord the King the several sums following : (that is to say), 

the said A. B. the sum of and the said L. M. and N. 0. the sum of 

each, of good and lawful money of Great Britain, to be made and levied of 
their several goods and chattels, lands and tenements respectively, to the use of 
our said lord the King, his heirs and successors, if he the said A. B.fail in 
the condition indorsed. Taken and acknowledged the day and year first 
above mentioned, at — , before us, J. S. 

J.N. 

The condition of the within-written recognizance is such, that whereas the 
said A. B. was this day charged before [us], the justices within mentioned for 
that [etc as in the warrant] ; if therefore the said A. B. will appear at the 
next court of oyer and terminer and general gaol delivery [or court of general 

quarter sessions of the peace] to be hoiden in and for the county of , and 

there surrender himself into the custody of the keeper of the [common gaol] 
there, and plead to such indictment as may be found against him by the grand 
jury for or in respect of the charge aforesaid, and take his trial upon the 
same, and not depart the said court without leave, then the said recognizance 
to be void, or else to stand in full force and virtue. 

(S2.) 

Notice of the said recognisance to be given to the accused and his bail.]— 

Take notice, that you A. B. of , are bound in the sum of , and your 

sureties [L. M. and N. O.] in the sum of each, that you A. B. appear 

[etc as in the condition of the recognizance], and not depart the said court 
without leave; and unless you the said A. B. personally appear and plead, 

A.O.P. 8 



Il6 indictment. 

before a justice of the peace, where it would be inconvenient to bring the 
prisoner and his bail before the court or judge in town ; or, on just cause 
being shown, to order that a party not in custody shall be admitted to bail 
on surrendering to a warrant. At common law the powers of the court 
were exercised by means of a writ of habeas corpus. Hale's Sum. 104; 
1 Chit. Cr. L. 98 ; Burn's J„ tit. u Bail? 369 (30th ed.}. Under the present 
practice of the Court, " applications for bail in felony or misdemeanor 
where the party is in custody, Shall be in the first instance by summons 
before a judge at chambers for a writ of habeas corpus, or to show cause 
why the defendant should not be admitted to bail either before a judge 
at chambers or before a justice of the peace, in such an amount as the 
judge may direct." Cr. Off. Rules, 1886, r. 122. No summons to show 
cause before a judge at chambers for bail in felony shall be issued without 
the leave of a judge upon an ex parte application. Rule 305. For the 
requisite) forms on applications for bail, see Appendix to Cr. Off. Rules, 
1886, Nos. 69 to 77. Affidavits must be entitled " In the High Court of 
Justice, King's Bench Division." Cr. Of. Rules, 1886, r. 7. 

If the judge at chambers refuses bail, a further application may be 
made to a divisional court, not by way of appeal, but de novo ; Short & 
Mellor, Cr. Off. Pract. 882; but there is no appeal to the Court of Appeal 
from the decision of a divisional court of the King's Bench Division upon 
an application for bail by a prisoner. R. v. Foote, 10 Q. B. D. 378 ; 52 L. J. 
(0. B.) 528. 

To avoid expense and inconvenience it is now the practice in almost 
all cases, instead of applying for a writ of habeas corpus, to apply for a 
summons before a judge in chambers, to show cause why the prisoner 
should not be admitted to bail before a justice of the peaoe. If the order 
be made, upon its being produced to a justice, he will admit the prisoner 
to bail. 

Wherj there is no inconvenience in the appearance of the prisoner 
and his bail in the court, counsel applies for a writ of habeas corpus ad 
subjiciendum, and also for a writ of certiorari, directed to the magistrate 
or coroner, as the case may be, to bring before the court the depositions 
on which the prisoner has been committed. The affidavits are entitled 
as in the case of a bail summons, and should verify the depositions (R. v. 
Barthelemy, 1 E. & B. 8 ; Dears. 60), and should be accompanied by a 
certified copy of the commitment, to which the accused is entitled as of 
right, under 81 Car. 2, c. 2, s. 4 (see Cr. Off. Rules, 1886, r. 85, Forms 172, 
173), and by a copy of the depositions. If these are not obtained, a 
certiorari to bring tnern up is necessary. 

Twenty-four hours' notice of bail, in cases of murder or manslaughter, 
must be served on the widow, if any there be, or next of kin of the 
deceased, and in other cases upon the prosecutor, and also on the coroner, 
or committing magistrate— personal service is not requisite. Returns 
having been duly made to the writs, when the prisoner is brought into 
court counsel moves that he be admitted to bail, and if there be no 
opposition the court will in its discretion admit the prisoner to bail, and 
the officer of the court will take the recognizance. In cases of felony the 
court usually requires/our sureties ; but for the inferior offences two are 
sufficient. R. v. Shaw, 6 Dow. & Ry. 154. The application to admit the 
prisoner to bail may be opposed by counsel, and affidavits may be used in 
answer to the application. When a prisoner is brought up to be bailed at 
chambers, the proceedings are nearly the same as those in court. Short 
A Mellor s Cr. Off. Pr. 380. 

Bail in case of removed indictments.'] — See post, Certioran, p. 184. 



Estreat of Recognizance. 117 

Bail on coroner's inquisition.] — See post, p. 160. 

Estreat of recognizance.] — If the condition of a recognizance entered into 
either by a party or by his sureties be broken, tho recognizance may 
be forfeited, and on forfeiture the obligees become debtors to the Crown 
for the sums in which thoy are respectively bound. 

Former practice.] — The ancient mode of enforcing a forfeited recogni- 
zance was to order its estreat into the Exchequer. The word " estreat " 
(extractum) means a true note of entries in the rolls of a court containing 
orders in favour of the revenue of the Crown : Westm. c. 2, Termes de la 
Ley. It was the duty of the clerks of all the King's courts to make up 
an accurate estreat roll showing the nature and details of all fines, 
forfeitures, eta, enforced by the court, and to return it to the Exchequer. 

The roll had to be verified by oath (4 W. & M. c 24, s. 4) ; wilful mis* 
statements were punishable (22 cfc 23 Car. 2, c. 22, s. 5) ; and failure to 
make the returns was ground for amercement (3 G. 1, c. 15, s. 12). 

Tho sums not received before the return of the roll were levied by 
the sheriff under the orders of the Court of Exchequer until 1822 (3 G. 
4, c 46). The Court of Exchequer had jurisdiction over recognizances 
forfeited before justices of the peace in or out of sessions. The juris- 
diction was abolished by 3 G. 4, c. 46, s. 2. R. v. Yorkshire, West Riding, 
J J., 7 A. & E. f 583, 590; 7 L. J. (A/. C.) 9 : R.v. Tfiampson, 3 Tyr. 73 : 
R. v. Nankins, M'CL & Y. 27. But this change in the law did not affect 
the power of the court to bring up the recognizance by certiorari from 
sessions: ex parte Pellow, M'Cl. 111; 28 R. R. 683; R. v. Brooke, 59 
J. P. 6, and did not affect the assizes : R. v. Hankins, ubi supra. 

The powers of the Court of Exchequer passed in 1875 to the //. C. J., 
and in 1880 to the K. B. B. (36 & 37> Vict. c. 66, ss. 16, 32, Order in Council, 
16 Dec, 1880. Statutory Rules and Orders Revised (ed. 1904), vol. 12, p. 1, 
tit. " Supreme Court England." 

Present practice—Superior CouHs.]— The practice of parliament, the 
Supreme Court, and courts of assize, respecting the estreat of recog- 
nizances, is governed by the Fines Act, 1833 (3 & 4 W. 4, c. 99), which 
repealed 22 & 23 Car. 2, c. 22. By ss. 26, 27, 28, provision is made for 
the rendering of an account to the Treasury, by the King's coroner and 
attorney, and the King's Remembrancer, of fines, amerciaments, penalties, 
and recognizances set, imposed or forfeited in the High Court, and for 
the estreat by those officers under order of the court or a judge of such 
fines, etc., levied and not received, and for their payment over of the fines, 
etc., as directed by the Treasury. By s. 29 it is provided, that an account 
in writing of all recognizances forfeited to or for the use of the crown, 
by or before any judge or judges of assize throughout England, shall 
within fourteen days next after such recognizances are forfeited be made 
ont by the clerk of assize, with the names and residences of the parties 
liable to make payment thereof, and he shall make out two copies, one to be 
sent to the Treasury, and such recognizances shall, within the time last 
aforesaid, be duly certified and estreated by the clerk of assize into the 
court of Exchequer. Under 22 <fc 23 Vict. c. 21, s. 32, clerks of assizo 
ceased to estreat fines, etc., into tho court of Exchequer, and now enrol 
the fines and send a copy to the sheriff unless under s. 38 the Treasury 
requires return of the estreat to the King's Remembrancer. Tho court 
of Exchequer, under a writ of privy seal, had power over penalties and 
forfeitures occurring at assizes, and could compound, or, in its dis- 
cretion, discharge! any recognisances. 33 H* 8i c 39, ss. 40-42; & v t 



118 Indictment. 

Hankins, M l Cl. & Y. 27, and ?*., p. 31. Tbe Treasury has a concurrent 
power under 3 & 4 IF. 4, c 99, ss. 33, 38. 

The court has a discretion as to whether to order the estreat of a 
recognizance. 

In B. v. Doyen, Lewes assizes, 1899, 34 £. J. Newsp. 645, a Frenchman 
was admitted to bail, his father being taken as surety, and went to France, 
where he became dangerously insane, so that, through no fault of 
the surety, he could not be produced at the trial. Wills, J., refused an 
application to estreat the recognizance, and said he could not make any 
order on the justices' clerk as to the amount, which was deposited with him. 

In B. v. Sangiovanni [1904] 68 J. P. 54, an estreat of the recognizances 
of sureties for a person committed for trial had been ordered on his 
failure to surrender. Fulton, Recorder, directed that the estreat should 
not issue, on being satisfied that the sureties had taken all reasonable steps 
to secure the attendance of the defendant. On finding that he had left 
for the United States, they had informed the police, and had telegraphed 
at their own expense to have the defendant detained on arrival. In con- 
sequence of their action he was not allowed to land, and was forced to 
return in the ship; but this being a Belgian vessel, it took him to a 
Belgian port. 

The estreat of recognizances on the Crown side of the King's Bench 
Division is regulated by the Crown Office flutes, 1886. 

" Every recognizance acknowledged on the removal of aji indictment, 
order, or other proceeding, or to prosecute any information granted by 
the Kingfs Bench Division, or for the appearing or answering of any party 
in the said Division, or for good behaviour, or for any other purpose, shall 
after the acknowledgment thereof, be transmitted to the crown office and 
filed there." B. 123. 

" No recognizance shall henceforth be forfeited, estreated, or put upon 
the estreat roll without the order of the court or a judge, nor unless an 
order or notice shall have been previously served upon the parties by 
whom such recognizances shall bare been given, calling upon them to 
perform the conditions thereof, and no default shall be considered to bo 
made in performing the conditions of a recognizance by reason of the 
trial of any indictment or presentment or the argument of any order or 
conviction or other proceeding having stood over where such indictment 
has been made a remanet, or such indictment or order has stood over by 
order of the court, or by concent in writing of the parties." JL 124. 

" Whenever it has been made to appear to the court or judge that a 
party has made default in performing the conditions of any recognizance, 
into which he has entered, filed in the crown office, the court or a judge 
upon notice to the defendant and his sureties, if any, may order such 
recognizance to be estreated into the Exchequer without issuing any writ 
of scire facias? B. 126. 

" No proceedings shall be taken in the crown office by scire facias upon 
recognizance." B. 127. 

Practice at sessions of the peace,'] — The practice for courts of quarter 
sessions as to the estreat of recognizances other than those of the defen- 
dant and his sureties is governed by s. 31 of the Criminal Law Act, 1826, 
(7 G- 4, c. 64), which provides that in every case where any person bound 
by recognizance for his or her appearance, or for whose appearance any 
other person shall be bound to prosecute or give evidence in any case of 
felony or misdemeanor, or to answer for any common assault, or to ai tides 
of the peace, or to abide an order in bastardy (this form of recognizance was 
abolished ty 5 <fc 6 W. 4. c. 76, s, 70), shall therein make default, the officer 



Estreat of Recognizance, 110 

of the court by whom the estreats are made out shall prepare a list in 
writing, specifying the name of every person so making default and the 
nature of the offence in respect of which every such person, or his or her 
surety, was so bound, together with the residence, trade, profession or 
calling of every such person or surety, and shall in such list distinguish 
the principals from the sureties, and shall state the cause, if known, why 
each such person has not appeared, and whether by reason of the non- 
appearance of such person the ends of justice have been defeated or 
delayed : and every such officer shall and is hereby required before any 
such recognizance shall be estreated to lay such list, if at a court of oyer 
and terminer in any county besides Middlesex and London" (i.e. City) . . . 
"before one of the justices of these courts respectively; if at a court wherein 
a recorder or other corporate officer is the judge or one of the judges, before 
such recorder or other corporate officer ; and if at a session of the peace, 
before the chairman or two other justices of the peace who shall havo 
attended such court, who are respectively authorized and required to 
examine such list, and to make such order touching the estreating or 
patting in process of any such recognizance as shall appear to them 
respectively to be just ; and it shall not be lawful for the officer of any 
court to estreat or put in process any such recognizance without the 
written order of the justice, recorder, corporate officer, chairman, or 
justice of the peace before whom respectively such list shall have been 

Subject to the special provisions of the Act above quoted, the general 
practice of courts of quarter sessions is governed by the Levy of Fines 
Act, 1822 (3 G. 4), c. 46, which directs (a. 2) that the clerk of the peace 
or town clerk shall copy on a roll such forfeited recognizances, and shall 
within such time as shall be fixed by the court of quarter sessions, not 
exceeding twenty-one days from the adjournment of such court, send a 
copy of such roll, with a writ of distringas and capias [see forms, ante, 
pp. 104* 105], or a writ of fieri facias and capias, to the sheriff of such county, 
which shall be the authority to him for proceeding to tho immediate levying 
and recovering of such forfeited recognizances. Sect. 8 of the same Act 
requires the sheriff to return the writ and roll on the first day of the quarter 
sessions with a return of what has been done under it, and s. 5 of the Levy 
of Fines Ad, 1823 (4 G. 4, c. 37), requires the clerk of the peace or town clerk 
to send to the Treasury within twenty days after the holding of quarter 
sessions a copy or extract of all rolls returned by the sheriff, with an 
account of the causes of the discharge by the court of any forfeiture, and 
the reason of the sheriff for any failure to levy a forfeited recognizance. 
In municipal boroughs in which the town clerk and clerk of the peace- 
are not the same person, the latter is to discharge the duties imposed on 
the town clerk by the Act of 1822 : see 45 <fr 46 Vict, c 50, *. 222. By s. 17 
of the Quarter Sessions Act, 1849 (12 & 13 Vict. c. 45), the provisions of the 
Acts of 1822 and 1823 as to the procedure with respect to forfeited recog- 
nizances are applied also to fines and amercements : as to which see re 
Nottingham Corporation (1897), 2 Q. B. 502 : R. v. Dover, 1 Cr. M. & 11. 
726 : 1 Chit. Or. L. 726 : 4 Chit. Cr. L. 487. 

In the case of a recognizance by the defendant the order to forfeit is 
made after he is called, and on his failure to appear during the sessions, 
without any further notice or summons. In the case of sureties, ss. 5, 6, 
of 3 G. 4, c. 46, give a right of appeal to the sessions to all persons whose 
recognizances have been forfeited if they give proper security : and on 
the appeal the court may discharge the whole or part of the forfeiture, 
and discharge the obligee if in custody, and by *. 2 of the Criminal 
Procedure Ad y 1853 (16 <fc 17 Vict c 30) courts of quarter sessions are 



120 Indictment. 

empowered to forfeit recognizances by principals or sureties to keep the 
peace or be of good behaviour, on proof of the conviction of the principal 
of any offence which is by law a breach of the conditions of the recog- 
nizance. The procedure of the Acts of 1822 (3 Geo. 4, c 46) is applied to 
recognizances so forfeited. 



Sect. 11. 

indictment, in what cases quashed. 

In what coses.] — If an indictment or inquisition is bad on the face of 
it, or there is any such insufficiency, either in the caption or in the body 
of an indictment or inquisition, as will make erroneous any judgment 
whatsoever given on any part thereof, the court may in its discretion quash 
the indictment. 2 Hawk. c. 25, «s. 146-149; 1 Chit. Cr. L. 298: B. v. 
Taylor, 9 Dowl. 600. Thus, before 5 & 6 Vict. c. 38, indictments for 
perjury at common law or forgery found at sessions were quashed because 
the sessions had no jurisdiction to inquire of perjury or forgery. B. v. 
Bainton, 2 Str. 1088, and see B. v. Bighy, 8 C. & P. 770 (but see ante, p. 
102). An indictment against 6ix for exercising a trade was quashed 
because it was a distinct offence in each, and could not be made the 
subject of a joint prosecution. B. v. Tucker, 4 Burr. 2046 : B. v. Weston, 
1 Str. 623. In B. v. Philips, 2 Str. 921, judgment was arrested on an indict- 
ment of six for perjury (to which four pleaded and were convicted"), on 
the ground that the offence was in its nature several, and two could not 
be indicted together for it. And in several instances indictments have 
been quashed, because the facts stated in them did not amount to an 
offence punishable by law ; see B. v. Burkett, Andr. 230 : B. v. Sarmon, 1 
Burr. 516 : B. v. Wright, 1 Burr. 543 : B. v. Philpotts, 1 C. & K. 112 ; as, 
for instance, an indictment for contemptuous words spoken to a justice 
of peace, not stating that they were spoken to him whilst in the execution 
of nis office. B. v. Leafe, Andr. 226 : and an indictment against an over- 
seer for misconduct in preparing electoral registers on the ground that 
the offence, if any, was not punishable on indictment. B. v. Hall [1891] 
1 Q. B. 747 : 60 L. J. (M. C.) 129. Where a defendant who has been 
committed for obtaining a chattel by false pretences, is indicted in one 
count for that offence, and in another count for obtaining another chattel 
by false pretences, without any authority obtained under 22 <fe 23 Vict, c 
17 (The Vexatious Indictments Act, 1859), or arising from the provisions 
of 30 & 31 Vict, c 35 (which had not then been passed), to prefer such 
second charge, it was held that the judge at the trial should direct the 
second count to be quashed. B. v. Fuidge, L. & C. 390 ; 33 L. J. (M. C.) 
74 (ante, p. 9). See also B. v. Bradlaugn\ 15 Cox, 156 (ante, p. 10). A 
count of an indictment may also lie quashed as being too general. On 
this ground a count under 32 dk 33 Vict. c. 62 (Debtors Act, 1869), s. 13 
(1) which alleged that the defendant did obtain credit from the prose- 
cutor " by means of fraud other than by false pretences " without setting 
out the means, was quashed. B. v. Bell, 12 Cox, 37, Montague Smith, J. 
But the effect of s. 19 was not considered, and the case is virtually over- 
ruled by B. v. Pierce, 56 L. J. (M. C.) 85 ; 16 Cox, 213 (C. C. B.) (ante, 
p. 70). An indictment under 46 A 47 Vict c 51, which charged the defen- 
dant with "corrupt practices,'' at a parliamentary election, without 
setting out the nature of such corrupt practices as "bribery," etc., was 
quashed as being too general. B. v. Norton, 16 Cox, 59, Pollock, B., 
approved by the majority of the judges in fi. v. Stroulger, 17 Q. B. Q. 



WIten quashed. 121 

327; 55 L. J. (if. C.) 137 (C. C. J?.). An indictment for obtaining money 
by false pretences was quashed by the jndge at the trial, after the case/or 
the prosecution had closed, on the jndge discovering that the indictment 
did not contain the words " with intent to defraud." R. v. James, 12 Cox, 
127, Lush, J. An indictment for libel was quashed, the expressions need 
in tk© alleged libel not being prima facie libellous, and the indictment 
containing no averments or innuendoes showing that those expressions 
were intended to impute improper conduct to the prosecutor. R. v. Yates, 
12 Cox, 233, Quain, J. So, the judge may in his discretion put the 
prosecutor to his election, or perhaps quash the indictment, where the 
defendant is charged with distinct felonies in different counts (ante, p. 
86), or with different misdemeanors in different counts (ante, p. 91), or 
with several offences in the same count (ante, p. 82). 

If the application be made on the part of the prosecution, the court 
will quash the indictment in all cases where it appears to be so defective 
that the defendant cannot be convicted on it, aud where the prosecution 
appears to be bond fide, and not instituted from malicious motives, or for 
the purposes of oppression. If the prosecution be instituted by the 
attorney-general, an application to quash the indictment is never made 
upon the part of the prosecutor, because the attorney-general may him- 
self enter a nolle prosequi, which will have the same effect (see post, s. 14). 
R. v. Stratton, 1 Doug. 239 : cf. R. v. Colling, 2 Cox, 184, as to the 
procedure where the indictment has been removed by certiorari. 

An application to quash may, it would seem, be made upon the part of 
the prosecution at any time before the defendant has been actually tned 
upon the indictment. See R. v. Webb, 3 Burr. 1468 : 1 W. Bl. 460. But 
after judgment for tho prisoner on demurrer, the indictment cannot be 
quashed at the instance of the prosecutor. R. v. W. Smith, 2 M . <fc Rob. 
109. Where tho application is made to the High Conrt, the rule is abso- 
lute in the first instance, if the defendant has not appeared and pleaded. 
R. v. Stowell, 1 Bowl. N. S. 320. 

Before an application of this kind is made on tho part of the prosecu- 
tion, a new bill for the same offence must have been preferred against the 
defendant and found. R. v. Wynn, 2 East, 226. And when the court, 
upon such an application, orders tho former indictment to be quashed, it 
is usually upon terms, namely, that the prosecutor shall pay to the 
defendant such costs as ho may have incurred by reason of the former 
indictment. R. v. Webb, 3 Burr. 1468: 1 W. Bl. 460. R. v. Z>mt?w, 1 C. 
<fc K. 730 ; that the second indictment shall stand in the same plight and 
condition to all intents and purposes that tho first would have done if it 
were not gnashed ; R. v. Glenn, 3 B. & Aid. 373: R. v. HV&6, ubi supra; 
and (particularly where there has been any vexatious delay upon the part 
of the prosecutor, Id.) that the name of the prosecutor be disclosed. R. 
V. Glenn, ubi supra. 

Where the application is made upon the part of the defendant, the 
conrt have almost uniformly refused to quash an indictment, where it 
appeared to be for some enormous crime, such as treason or felony ; Com. 
Big. Indictment (H.) ; 2 Hawk. c. 25, s. 146 ; 1 East, P. C. 110 : R. v. 
Sheares, 27 Si. Tr. 255, 266 ; 1 Chit. Cr. L. 298 : R. v. Lynch [1903] 1 A". B. 
444: R. v. Johnson, 1 Wils. 325 ; or for forgery, perjury, subornation, or 
nuisance to highways. R. v. Belton, 1 Salk. 372 ; Anon., 1 Vent. 369 : cf. 
1 Sid. 54; R. v. Thomas, 3 D. & R. 621 : R. v. Burnby, 5 Q. B. 348; 13 
L J. (M. C.) 29 : R. v. Withers, 4 Cox, 17. They have also refused to 
quash indictments for cheating, R. v. Or bell, 6 Mod. 42 ; for selling flour 
by false weights, R. v. Crookes, 3 Burr. 1841 ; for extortion or oppression, 
& v, Wadsworth, 5 Mod, 13; for not executing a magistrate's warrant, 



122 Indiclmeut. 

11. v. Bailey, 2 Sir. 1211 ; against overseers for not paying money over to 
their successors, B. v. King, 2 Sir. 1268, and the like. The court also 
will not quash indictments for not repairing highways or bridges, or 
for other public nuisances, B. v. Belton, 1 Salk. 372; Anon., 1 Vent. 369 : 
B. v. Bishop, Andr. 220: J?, v. Sutton, 4 Burr. 2116, unless there be a 
certificate that the nuisance is removed ; B. v. Leyton, Cro. Car. 584 : 
B. v. Wigg, 2 Salk. 460; 1 Ld. Baym. 1165; nor will they quash an 
indictment for forcible entry, B. v. Dyer, 6 Mod. 96, unless, perhaps, 
where the possession has been afterwards given up. 

But when it is made clear, either on the face of an indictment or 
by affidavit, that it has been found without jurisdiction, the court will 
quash it on motion by tho defendant after plea pleaded ; although in a 
doubtful case they will leave him to his writ of error, B. v. Heane, 4 
B. <fc & 947; 33 L. J. (M. C.) 115; or to his right to demur, B. v. 
Browtdow, 11 A. <fc E. 119, 127, 128 ; or to move in arrest of judgment. B. v. 
Lyncli [1903] 1 K. B. 444 : B. v. Sheares, 27 St. Tr. 359. It is said that 
a motion to quash will not be granted upon a trial of an indictment, at 
nisi prim, if the objections taken appear on the record. B. v. Sotder, 2 
Stark. (N. P.) 423. It is no ground for quashing an indictment for non- 
compliance with the provisions of the Vexatious Indictments Act (22 & 23 
Vict. c. 17, s. 1), that the charge arising in one petty sessional division of 
a county, the committal is by justices sitting in and acting for another 
petty sessional division of the same county, such a committal being good 
m point of law. B. v. Beckley, 20 Q. B. D. 187; 57 L. J. (M. C.) 22. 

Where two indictments against the same defendant, one for felony and 
the other for misdemeanor, had been removed into the court of Queen's 
Bench by certiorari, the court refused to quash them on an affidavit that 
they both related to the same transaction. B. v. Stockley, 3 Q. B. 238 ; 11 
L. J. (M. C.) 105. See ante, p. 99. 

Where an indictment is clearly bad in law the court may refuse to try 
it, and discharge the jury from giving a verdict, though there has been no 
demurrer or motion to quash. B. v. Deacon, By. & M. 27 : B. v. Tremearne, 
Id. 147: B. v. Hepper, Id. 210 : 1 C. & P. 608. 

How.] — The application to quash an indictment is made to the court 
where the bill is found ; except in cases of indictments at sessions or in 
other inferior courts, in which cases the application may be made to the 
High Court of Justice (K. B. D.) after removing the record by certiorari. 
But a court of quarter sessions has itself authority to quash an indictment 
found there, before plea pleaded. B. v. Wilson, 6 Q. B. 620; 14 L. J. 
(Jf. C.) 3. 

It was formerly held that the application, if made upon the part of tho 
defendant, must in all cases be made before plea pleaded ; Fost. 231 : B. 
v. Booktvood, cas. temp. Holt, 684; 13 St. Tr. 139; out this, while just and 
convenient, is not essential ; B. v. Wright, 1 Burr. 543 : B. v. Chappie, 17 
Cox, 455 ; and where it is clear that an indictment has been found without 
jurisdiction, or has a substantial and apparent defect, the court will quash 
it on motion by the defendant after plea pleaded ; B. v. Heane, 4 B. <fe S. 
947 ; 33 L. J. (M. C.) 115 ; and even after the case for the prosecution bad 
closed. B. v. James, 12 Cox, 127. Where an indictment had already, 
upon the application of the defendant, been removed into the court 
of King's Bench by certiorari, the court refused to entertain a motion by 
the defendant to quash the indictment after a forfeiture of his recognizance 
by not having carried the record down for trial ; Anon., 1 Salk. 380 ; and 
a motion to quash after certiorari, trial and conviction has been refused. 
B. v. Marsh) 6 A. & E. 236. A motion to quash an indictment for any 



When tried. 123 

formal defect apparent on the face of it must be made before I be jury are 
sworn, and upon its being made the court may amend the indictment, and 
proceed with the trial as if no such defeot had existed. 14 <fe 15 Vict, c 
100, s. 25 (ante, p. 55). 



Sect. 12. 
indictment, when and wiiebe tbisd. 

When.}— Indictments for high treason or felony are usually tried at the 
same assizes or sessions at which they are preferred to and found by the 
grand jury. This practice accords with the requirements of s. 6 of the 
Habeas Corpus Act, 1679 (31 Car. 2, c. 2). 

The same course is now pursued as to misdemeanors. By 14 & 15 Vict, 
c. 100, s. 27, " no person prosecuted shall be entitled to traverse or postpone 
the trial of any indictment found against him at any session of the peace, 
session of oyer and terminer, or session of gaol delivery : provided always, 
that if the court, upon the application of the person so indicted or other- 
wise, shall be of opinion that ne ought to be allowed a further time, either 
to prepare for his defence or otherwise, such court may adjourn the trial 
of such person to the next subsequent session, and upon such terms as to 
bail or otherwise as to such court shall seem meet, and may respite the 
recognizances of the prosecutor and witnesses accordingly, in which case 
the prosecutor and witnesses shall be bound to attend to prosecute and 
give evidence at such subsequent session without entering into any fresh 
recognizance for that purpose." This enactment abolished the old practice 
which entitled the defendant in cases of misdemeanor to postpone his 
trial till the next assizes or sessions. 4 Bl. Com. 351. 

Postponement of trial.'] — The trial may, however, be postponed to the 
next assizes or sessions at the instance of the prosecutor or the defendant, 
on showing to the court a sufficient cause for the delay, such as the sudden 
illness of the prisoner, or the unavoidable absence or illness of a necessary 
and material witness, the existence of prejudice in the jury, and the like 
See 31 Car. 2, c. 2,8.6: R. v. IT Eon, 3 Burr. 1513 : 2?. v. Jolliffe, 4 T. R. 285 : 

2 R. It. 383: R. v. Morphew, 2 M . <fc Set. 602 : 15 R. R. 366 : R. v. Hunter, 

3 C. & P. 591 : R. v. Slreek, 2 C.& P. 413 : R. v. Stevenson, 2 Leach, 546 : 
R. v. Chapman, 8C.&P. 558 : R. v. Owen, 9 C. & P. 83 : R. v. Macarthy, 
V. & Mar. 625 : R. v. Mobbs, 2 F. & F. 18 : R. v. Langhurst, 10 Cox, 353 : 
R. v. Taylor, 11 Cox, 840: R. T. Dripps, 18 Cox, 25 (Jr.). InR. v. Palmer, 
6 C. <fc P. 652, the Central Criminal Court postponed until the next session 
the presentment of a bill for arson to the grand jury, upon the ground of the 
illness of a witness sworn to be material, and refused to examine her deposi- 
tion to ascertain whether she deposed to material facts. In R. v. Hccson, 14 
Cox, 40, it was held by Lush, J., that the presentment of a bill to the grand 
jury cannot be postponed to the next assizes, on the ground that other and 
like charges may before that time be brought against the prisoner, and 
that if no bill was presented the prisoner would be entitled to her discharge 
on bail. Bis lordship said that the case of R. v. Palmer, ubi supra, was an 
application founded on the absence of a material witness for the crown, 
which was provided for by «. 6 of the Habeas Corpus Act, 1679 (31 Car. 2, 
c 2). Where a witness for the Crown, on the ground of whose illness it is 
sought to postpone the trial, was not examined before the committing 
magistrate, the court will require an affidavit as to what the witness is 
expected to prove. R. v. Savage, 1 C. & K. 75 : /?. v. Lawrence, 4 F. cfr F. 



124 Indictment 

901. In R. v. Taylor, 15 Cox, 8, Baggallay, L.J., postponed the present- 
ment of a bill to the next assizes, on the ground that all tbe witnesses 
resided at a workhouse in which small-pox had broken out, and that their 
attendance at the assizes would be dangerous to the public, as they might 
carry infection, and admitted the prisoner to bail on his own recognizances 
to appear at the next assizes. The production by the prosecution at the 
trial of evidence not produced before the magistrate, and not communi- 
cated to the prisoner previously to the trial, may be ground for a 
postponement of the trial in the interests of the defendant. H. v. 
Flannagan, 15 Cox, 403. Where the defendant was indicted for having 
carnal knowledge of a girl under ten years old, and application by the 
prosecution for the postponement of the trial, with a view to the instruc- 
tion of the girl, was refused. R. v. Nicholas, 2C.&K. 246. It seems that 
the trial may be postponed, on the defendant's application, after the jury 
have licen charged with the indictment, and before any evidence has been 
given in the case. R. v. Fitzgerald, 1 C. & K. 201. See R. v. Downey, 3 
Or. & Dix (Ir.) 314. Where the application is made by the defendant, he 
will be remanded and detained in custody until the next assizes or 
sessions ; but where the application is made by the prosecutor, it is in 
the discretion of the court either to detain the defendant in custody or 
admit him to bail, or to discharge him on his own recognizances, R. v. 
Beardmore, 7 C. <fe P. 497 : R. v. Parish, Id. 782 : R. v. Osborne, Id. 799 : 
R. v. Bridyman, C. & Mar. 271. After a bill has been found, if the offence 
be of a serious nature, or an absent witness has been kept out of the way 
by the defence, the court will not admit the prisoner to bail. R. v. 
Chapman, 8 C. <fc P. 558: R. v. Guttridge, 9 C. & P. 228 : R. V. Owen, Id. 
83 : R. v. Bowen, Id. 509. See Bail, ante, pp. 110, 111. 

Under the Assizes Relief Act, 1889 (52 & 53 Vict. c. 12), if a person com- 
mitted for trial at sessions is not tried at the next sessions, the next court 
of assize may on his application try or discharge him or release him on 
bail, unless the delay is due to special reasons, such as the removal of the 
indictment by certiorari, or the impossibility of producing the witnesses 
for the crown. S. 3 (1) (3). If the next court of quarter sessions has not 
tried him before the next subsequent assizes, tbe judge of assize must try 
or discharge him. S. 3 (2). 

S. G of the Habeas Corpus Act, 1679 (31 Car. 2, c. 2), provides for the 
release of persons committed for trial for high treason or felony if they 
are not indicted at the latest in the second term, assizes, or sessions after 
their committal. 

Adjournment of trial."] — The powers as to adjourning a trial when onoe 
begun are dealt with under " Trial," post, p. 213. 

Where.'] — Indictments for felonies and misdemeanors are tried within 
the jurisdiction in which the offence is committed, or in which by some 
statute it may lawfully be tried (ante, p. 36, et seq.), and before the court 
in which the indictment is preferred, or into which it has been removed 
by certiorari or order of removal. 

The following statement will show the courts competent to try any in- 
dictable offence, subject to the rules as to venue and national jurisdiction 
stated ante, pp. 36-51 : — 

JJiyh Court.]— The High Court of Justice (K. B. D.), as the successor of 
the court of King's Bench, has jurisdiction to try all indictable offences 
against the law of England. This jurisdiction is concurrent with that of 
the courts of oyer qnd terminer, or gaql (Jeliverv ? or courts of quarter 



Where tried. 125 

sessions. Hie jurisdiction is not exercised except (1) Where tho indict- 
ment is removed into the court by certiorari; (2) Where the indictment is 
found in the counties of London or Middlesex by a grand jury summoned 
under 85 A 36 Vict. c. 52, and B. 8. C, Jan. 15, 1903, made under s. 89 (3) 
of the Local Government Act, 1888 (see post, p. 195) ; (3) In the case of 
informations filed in the court (see post, p. 142). The court has special 
jurisdiction to try the following offences : — Wilful neglect or delay to 
deliver or transmit writs for the election of members of parliament 
(53 G. 3, c. 89, 0.6) ; oppression and crimes by governors, etc., of colonies, 
or persons in public employment out of Great Britain (11 W. 3, c. 12 ; 
42 G. 3, c 85) ; offences bv officials of the crown in India (10 G. 3, c. 47, 
s. 4 ; 13 G. 3, c. 63, s. 39 ; 21 G. 3, c. 70, s. 7). As to offences in India, see 
Ilbert, Government of India, 259, 265. None of these Acts appears to 
extend to treason or felony. B. v. Shaxve, 5 M . & Sel. 403 ; 17 B. B. 370. 
Prosecutions under them have been rare. See R. v. Jones, 8 East, 31 : 
Pictoris ease, 30 St. Tr. 225: B. v. Eyre, L. B. 3 Q. B. 487 : B. v. Turner 
[1889J 24 L. J. Newsp. 466, 469, 479. 

Courts of Assize, etc]— Courts acting under a commission of assize only 
try such criminal offences as are sent to them for trial on a transcript of 
a record of the King's Bench Division of the High Court of Justice. See 
Short & Mellor, Or. Off. Pr. 90, and post, tit. " Certiorari:' The ordinary 
circuit courts of oyer and terminer and gaol delivery have jurisdiction to 
try any offence triable at common law, or by statute, in the county or 
other district for which they are commissioned, and not specifically 
excluded from their jurisdiction. Courts of assize, oyer and terminer, 
and gaol delivery, were made part of the High Court by ss. 16, 29 of the 
Judicature Act, 1873 : B. v. Dudley, 14 0. B. D. 273, 560; if. v. Parke 
[1903] 2 K. B. 432, 436. Special commissions of oyer and terminer, etc., 
can be issued, but are now rare. The jurisdiction of these courts is con- 
current with that of quarter sessions as to cases wherein the latter have 
jurisdiction. 

Central Criminal Court.]— The Central Criminal Court is created by a 
commission of oyer and terminer and gaol delivery for the district allotted 
to it, and for the prisons appointed as its prisons (4 & 5 W. 4, c. 36, ss. 2-4 ; 
44 A 45 Vict. c. 64, s. 2: B. v. Boaler, 17 Cox, 569 : B. v. Marshall, 
31 L. J. Newsp. 48). It has also a special admiralty jurisdiction (4 & 5 
W. 4, c, 35, *. 22). The history of the court is to be found in 6 St. Tr., 
N. S. 1135 : and see Leverson v. B., L. B. 4 Q. B. 394. Under the Judi- 
cature Act, 1873 (88 & 39 Vict. c. 66), ss. 16, 29, it has become a branch 
of the High Court. B. v. Parke [1903] 2 K. B. 432, 439, 442. 

Courts of Quarter Sessions: 1. Relation to courts of assize.] — Where the 
quarter sessions of a county occur while the judge of assize is proceeding 
with the trial of prisoners in that county, after the grand jury have been 
discharged, it has been considered proper that the quarter sessions should 
not proceed with the trial of prisoners, but after disposing of their other 
business, should adjourn to a future day. See 9 C. & P. 790. But as the 
authority of a county or borough court of quarter sessions is not in law 
determined or suspended by the commission of assize, a trial at the sessions, 
during the continuance of the assizes in the same county, is valid in law. 
Smith v. B^ 13 Q. B. 738; 18 L. J. (M. C.) 207. As regards quarter 
sessions within the Central Criminal Court district, this rule is expressly 
recognized by 4 & 5 W. 4, c. 36, s. 21. 

It was the duty of the sheriff under 8 H. 7, c. 3, and is the duty of the 
governor of the prison, to lay before the court a calendar of prisoners in 



126 Indictment 

the prison fur Irial before it : 5 & 6 W. 4, c. 38, s. 3 ; 14 <fc 15 Vict, c 55, 
s. 19; and 28 <fe 29 Vict, c 125, s. 62. 

Some judges of assize have in recent years considered it their duty to 
deliver the gaols of the prisoners whom they found there, although the 
offences for which such prisoners had been committed were within the juris- 
diction of quarter sessions, and although the prosecutor and his witnesses 
had been bound over to prosecute and give evidence at quarter sessions. 
The English statutes and decisions on this question are collected in B. v. 
Clifford [1895] 16 New South Wales Rep. Law, 12. By the Quarter Sessions 
Act, 1894 (57 & 58 Vict, c 6), courts of quarter sessions have power to fix 
or alter the time for holding the then next quarter sessions, so as to pre- 
vent their clashing with the next assizes. The dates of borough quarter 
sessions are fixed by the recorder subject to the directions of the Home 
Secretary (45 <fe 46 Vict. c. 50, s. 165) : see Archbold, Q. S. (5th ed.) 
72 75 

The Assizes Belief Act, 1889 (52 & 53 Vict. c. 12), provides («. 1) that 
whenever any person has been committed to gaol or admitted to bail by 
a justice or justices under s. 22 or s. 25 of 11 & 12 Vict c. 42, charged with 
an indictable offence triable at quarter sessions, the persons bound over 
to prosecute and give evidence shall be bound over to attend for that 
purpose at the next practicable court of quarter sessions having jurisdic- 
tion to try such person for such offence, unless such justice or justices 
for special reasons think fit otherwise to direct ; and where the persons 
are so bound over, the person charged shall be tried at the said court of 
quarter sessions, and a court of oyer and terminer or general gaol delivery 
shall not be required to deliver such person from gaol, unless the High 
Court of Justice shall by order direct that such person shall be indicted 
and tried at a court of oyer and terminer or general gaol delivery having 
jurisdiction to try him for such offence. Subs. 2 of s. 1, prescribes the 
procedure where the High Court has made the order mentioned in sub- 
s.l. S.S prescribes the course of procedure where a prisoner having 
been committed to gaol on a charge for an indictable offence, and persons 
having been bound over to prosecute and give evidence at quarter sessions, 
the prisoner is not tried at those sessions. 

2. Jurisdiction.] — The present form of the Commission of the Peace 
(prescribed by Order in Council of Feb. 22, 1878, and printed in Statutory 
Bules and Orders Bevised (ed. 1904), vol. 1, tit. " Clerk of the Cronm "), 
authorizes the justices to inquire "of all and all manner of crimes and 
trespasses, and all and singular other offences of which the justices of 
our peace may or ought lawfully to inquire," . . . except in cases of 
difficulty, which are to be transmitted to the assizes, " and to hear and 
determine all and singular the crimes, trespasses, and offences aforesaid 
according to the laws and statutes of our realm, as in the like case it 
has been accustomed or ought to be done." As to the jurisdiction of 
courts of quarter sessions under the commission of the peace, see Arch* 
bold, Q. S. (5th ed.) 269 : Keen, v. B., 10 Q. B. 923 : 2 Cox, 341. A 
court of county or borough quarter sessions has jurisdiction to try any 
indictable offence except those in the annexed list This j urisdiction rests 
on the Quarter Sessions Act, 1842 (5 & 6 Vict. c. 83, s. 1) except in the 
cases in italics, which depend on the particular statutes specified :— 

1. Treason, or misprision of treason ; 

2. Murder; 

8. Capital felony, or any felony, except burglary (59 <fe 60 Vict, c 57), 
which when committed by a person not previously convicted of felony, is 
punishable by penal servitude for life (20 A 21 Vict. c. S, ss. 2, 6) ; 



Jurisdiction of Quarter Sessions. 127 

4. Offences Against the King's title, prerogative, person, or government, 
or against either House of Parliament ; 

5. Offences subject to the penalties of praemunire ; 

6. Blasphemy, and offences against religion ; 

7. Administering and taking unlawful oaths $ 

8. Perjury and subornation of perjury ; 

9. Making or suborning any other person to make a false oath, affirma- 
tion, or declaration, punishable as perjury or as a misdemeanor ; 

10. Forgery * 

11. Offences 'against the False Personation Act, 1874 (87 & 88 Vict. 
c.36, s. 3); 

12. Unlawfully and maliciously setting fire to crops of corn, grain, or 
pulse, or to any part of a wood, coppice, or plantation of trees, or to any 
heath, gorse, furze, or fern ; 

13. Offences against 8. 9 of the Night Poaching Act, 1828 (9 G. 4, c. 69) ; 

14. Bigamy and offences against the laws relating to marriage ; 

15. Abduction of women and girls, and indictable offences against the 
Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1885 (48 & 49 Vict. c. 69, s. 17) ; 

16. Endeavouring to conceal the birth of a child ; 

17. Composing, printing, or publishing blasphemous, seditious, or 
defamatory libels ; 

18. Bribery [except bribery of and by members, etc., of corporations, 
within 52 <fc 53 Vict. c. 69, s. 6] ; 

19. Corrupt practices at parliamentary or municipal elections, including 
elections of county, district, and parish councils, and of boards of guardians 
(17 & 18 Vict. c. 102, 8. 10 ; 46 & 47 Vict. c. 51, s. 53 ; 47 <ft 48 Vict. c. 70, 
ss. 30, 35, & 36, sch. ; 51 <fe 52 Vict. c. 41, s. 75 ; 56 & 57 Vict c. 73, s. 48), 
or elections in the city of London (47 & 48 Vict. c. 70, s. 85 ; 50 <fe 51 Vict. c. 
xiii.) ; or of metropolitan borough councils (62 <fc 63 Vict c. 14) ; 

20. Unlawful combinations and conspiracies, except conspiracies and 
combinations to commit any offence which the justices or recorder 
respectively have or has jurisdiction to try when committed by one 
person; 

2L Stealing or fraudulently taking, or injuring or destroying, records 
or documents belonging to any court of law or equity, or relating to any 
proceeding therein ; 

22. Stealing, or fraudulently destroying or concealing, wills of testa- 
mentary papers, or any document or written instrument being or con- 
taining evidence of the title to any real estate, or any interest in lands, 
tenements, or hereditaments ; 

23. Misdemeanors against ss. 77-86 of the Larceny Act, 1861 (which 
relate to frauds by persons entrusted with powers of attorney, factors, 
agents, trustees, and directors and officers of public companies, etc.), 24 
£25 Vict, c 96, s. 87 ; 

24. Misdemeanors against the Larceny Act, 1901 (1 Ed. 7, c. 10 : fraudulent 
conversion of property by persons entrusted therewith) ; 

25. Offences against the Official Secrets Act, 1889 (52 <fc 58 Vict. c. 52, 
a. 6 (8)). 

Offences against the bankruptcy laws are now triable at quarter 
sessions : see 32 & 33 Vict, c 62, *. 20, and 37 & 38 Vict c. 96 (Stat. Law 
Rev.\ which repealed the provision to the contrary in 5 & 6 Vict. c. 38, s. 1. 

The jurisdiction of quarter sessions to try a person for the common law 
misdemeanor of attempting to commit suicide, is not taken away by 24 & 
25 Vict. c. 100, 88. 11-16, which render an attempt to commit murder a 
felony, punishable by penal servitude for life; for attempting to kill 
one's self is not an attempt to commit murder within the meaning of that 



128 Indictment. 

statute. R. v. Burgess, L. A C. 258; 32 L. J. (M. C.) 55. Where an 
indictment charged that the defendants conspired by divers falso pre" 
tences to defraud the prosecntor of his money ; and it was objected that 
the facts ought to have been set out, so as to show that the false pretences 
were within the jurisdiction of the sessions, by which the indictment had 
been tried, the court of Queen's Bench held that, after verdict it must be 
taken that tho jury had found the defendants guilty on facts, proving a 
conspiracy to defraud by such false pretences as were cognizable by the 
sessions. Latham v. R., 5 B. & S. 635 ; 33 L. J. (M. C.) 197. 

A court of quarter sessions cannot try an indictment against a corpora- 
tion. See ante, p. 11 ; post, p. 130. 

Courts of quarter sessions have power to transmit to the assizes for 
trial indictments found before them which they have no jurisdiction to 
try, or which from the nature of the charge should more properly be tried 
at assizes. The power arises under the commission of the peace, and is 
preserved by s. 5 of the Assizes Relief Act, 1889 (52 <fc 53 Vict, c. 12). It 
is specifically given as to quarter sessions within the Central Criminal 
Court district by 4 <fc 5 W.i, c 36, s. 19. These powers are distinct from 
the procedure by certiorari, post, p. 129. 

Indictments found at the sessions and transmitted by the justices to 
the assizes must be tried nt the assizes, although they be not moved by 
certiorari. R. v. Wetherell, R. & R. 331. An indictment was found at 
quarter sessions against the defendant, who was, upon a certificate of such 
finding, taken beforo a justice under 11 & 12 Vict. c. 42, s. 3, and bound 
by recognizances to appear and plead at the assizes. The indictment was 
not transmitted to the assizes, but remained in the custody of the clerk of 
the peace. It was held that tho transmission of the indictment to the 
assizes was in the discretion of the justices, and that the judge of assize 
had no power to order such transmission, and that the indictment having 
been found at sessions and not transmitted for trial at the assizes, it 
could not be tried at tho assizes. Another indictment against the defen- 
dant for the same offence having however been found by tho grand jury 
at the assizes, it was held, that the defendant being bound by the above- 
mentioned recognizance, must to called upon it to plead to such second 
indictment R. v. Wildman, 12 Cox, 354, Keating, J. 

Change of place of trial.]— The King's Bench Division of tho High Court 
of Justice has jurisdiction to change the place of trial of any felony or 
misdemeanor, whenever it is necessary for the purpose of securing, so far 
as possible, a fair and impartial trial. R. v. Holden, 5 B. & Ad. 347, 354, 
Denman, L.C.J. : and see R. ▼. Boughton [1895] 2 Jr. Rep. 886. For this 
purpose a writ of certiorari must issue to remove the indictment into the 
King's Bench Division, unless the court or a judge think fit to direct the 
trial to be held at the Central Criminal Court, under 19 rf* 20 Vict, c 16, 
post, p. 136. Indictments may be removed from the Crown Court of 
Assize without a certiorari, because the court is made part of the High 
Court by the Judicature Act, 1873 (36 A 37 Vict. c. 66, ss. 16, 29. R. v. 
Dudley, 14 Q. B. D. 273, 560 ; 64 L. J. (M. C.) 32. An order, however, for 
their removal is requisite, which is obtained in tho same way, and is 
subject to the same conditions, certiorari. See Cr. Off. Rules, it. 28-34, 
post. 



Certiorari 129 

Sect. 13. 

CKBTIOBABI. 

Ths writ of certiorari is an original writ, usually issuing out of the 
King's Bench Division, when the crown would be certified of any record 
in any other court of record. Fitz. N. B. 245 a. ; 36 & 3Z Vict, c 66, s. 34. 
It may also, under 4 <fc 5 W. 4, c 36, s. 16, be issued by tbe judges of the 
High Court who are in the commission of the Central Criminal Court, 
and by the recorder of the city of London, to remove from courts of 

Snarter sessions having jurisdiction within the Central Criminal Court 
istrict, indictments found in such courts for offences cognizable by the 
Central Criminal Court under the Act ; and may be issued under 5 <fc 6 
Yict. c 38, «. 2, by a judge of assize in respect of indictments found as 
taken before courts of quarter sessions (for any county or borough within 
his commission) in respect of offences which they have no jurisdiction 
to try (ante, p. 126). There seems, however, to be no power to remove 
by certiorari the order of a justice committing a person for trial for an 
indictable offence. See R. v. Roscommon. Justices [1894] 2 Jr. Rep. 158. 
The power to remove by certiorari an indictment found at quarter sessions 
is not affected by 52 <fe 53 Vict. c. 12 (Assizes Relief Ad, 1889). See s. 5. 
The writ is directed in the King's name to the judges or officers of 
inferior courts, requiring them to return the records of a certain indict- 
ment or inquisition depending before them, in order that the party may 
have the benefit of a trial in the King's Bench Division, or before such 
justices as bis Majesty shall assign to hear and determine the cause. 
For the removal of indictments into the King's Bench Division the writ 
is sued out of the King's Bench Division and issued from the crown 
office : that division of the High Court, as successor to the old court of 
King's Bench, having a general superintendence over all other courts of 
criminal jurisdiction, whether ancient or newly created (2 Hawk, c. 27, 
s. 22), and being the sovereign ordinary court of justice in criminal 
causes. 4 Bl. Com. 320 : 36 <fc 87 Vict. c. 66, s. 34. This writ is frequently 
used in order the better to consider and determine the validity of indict- 
ments and tbe proceedings thereon, and to prevent a partial and 
insufficient trial, which it is apprehended would take place in the 
original jurisdiction. 1 Chit. Cr. L. 371 ; 2 Hale, 210. The effect of 
the writ is to remove all proceedings such as are described therein, wluch 
have taken place between tbe teste and return, although they may have 
been commenced after the teste. R. v. Battams, 1 East, 298 ; 2 Hawk. c. 27, 
s. 73. It may be applied for before or after the finding of any indictment. 
60 G. 3 & 1 G. 4, c. 4, «. 4. The writ is of no effect unless it is delivered 
to the court below before the time for its return has expired. 

Form of the writ.]— The following is the form of the writ of certiorari 
to remove an indictment into the King's Bench Division, addressed to 
the justices of quarter sessions : — 

Edward the Seventh, by the grace of God of the United Kingdom of Great 
Britain and Ireland and of the British dominions beyond the seas King 
defender of the faith, to the keepers of our peace and our justices assigned to 
hear and determine divers crimes, trespasses, and other offences committed 
within our county of D., and to every of them, greeting : We, being willing 
for certain reasons that all and singular indictments of whatsoever felonies 
[or misdemeanors'] whereof A. B. is [if indictment not yet preferred, add, or 
may be] before you indicted (as it said) be determined before us in the King's 

A.C.P. 9 



130 Indictment* 

BtncJt, Division of our High Court of Justice, and not elsewhere, do command 
you and every of you that you or one of you do forthwith send under your 
seals, or the seal of one of you, before us in our said court at the Royal 
Courts of Justice, London, all and singular the said indictments, with all 
things touching the same, by whatsoever name the said A. B. may be called 
therein, together with this our writ, that we may cause further to be done 
thereon what right of and according to the law and custom of England we 
shall see Jit to be done. Witness, Richard Everard, Baron Alverstone, at the 
Royal Courts of Justice, London, the day of , in the year 

of our Lord, V30 • 

, The writ must bear the following indorsements : — 

By order of court [or of Mr. Justice , as the case may be]. 

At the instance of the prosecutor [or defendant]. 

Recognizance by the prosecutor [or defendant] in the sum of £ 9 

with [two] sureties in the sum of £ each. 

This writ was issued by E. F., of , agent for C. D. 9 

of , solicitor for the prosecutor [or defendant}, 

[For other forms of the writ, see Appendix to Cr. Off. Rules, 1880, 
Forms 7, 8, <fc 9]. 

In what cases granted.}-— The writ of certiorari is demandable as of right 
by the crown (R. v. Eaton, 2 T. R. 89 ; 1 R. R. 436 ; R. v. Thomas, 
4 M.& S. 442 ; 16 R. R. 520), and issues as of course where the attorney- 
general or other officer of the crown applies for it, either as prosecutor 
or as conducting the defence on behalf of the crown ; Id. : R. v. Lewis, 
4 Burr. 2456, 2458; and this, even though the certiorari be expressly 
taken away by statute ; for, as a general rale, the crown is not bound by 
statute unless expressly named therein : Bardcastle on Statutes (3rd ed.) 
pp. 383-402. (For form of attorney-general's fiat for application for 
certiorari, see Appendix to Cr. Off. Rules, 1886, Form 23.) By analogy to 
this rule, the certiorari was formerly granted almost of course to private 
prosecutors, wbo were said to represent the crown, at whose suit all 
indictments are preferred. But now, "no indictment, except indict- 
ments against bodies corporate not authorized to appear by solicitor in 
the court in which the indictment is preferred, shall be removed into the 
King's Bench Division, either at the instance of the prosecutor or of the 
defendant (other than the attorney-general acting on behalf of the crown), 
unless it be made to appear to the court or a judge, by the party applying, 
that a fair and impartial trial of the case cannot be had in the court 
below, or that some question of law of more than usual difficulty and 
importance is likely to arise upon the trial, or that a view of the premises 
in respect whereof any indictment is preferred, or a special jury, may 
be required for a satisfactory trial of the same." Cr. Off. Rules, 1886, r. 29, 
which supersedes 16 <fc 17 Vict c. 80, s. 4 (rep.), as to which see R. v. Gate 
Fulford, 6 Cox, 510. The reason for the provision as to bodies corporate 
is that they cannot appear by attorney in courts of oyer and terminer, or 
gaol delivery or at sessions of the peace. R. v. Birmingham and Gloucester 
Rait. Co., 9C.&P. 469, Parke, B. 

The difficult points of law likely to arise must be specifically pointed 
out in order to induce the court to grant a certiorari, and must be stated 
in the rule. R. v. Joule, 5 A. & E. 539 ; R. v. Josephs, 8 Bowl. 178. If 
it be clearly made out that there is a fair and reasonable probability of 
partiality and prejudice in the jurisdiction within which the indictment 



Certiorari 131 

would otherwise be tried, the certiorari will be granted : A v. Lewis, 
2 Str. 704 : A v. Fawle, 2 £rf. ifoym. 1452 ; B. v. Waddington, 1 JBbtf , 
167 ; 6 A B. 238 : A v. Penprase, 4 A <ft -4rf. 573; 1 A 7 ei;. <fe M. 312 : A t. 
Bunt, SB. A Aid. 444 : B. v. JSTo&fen, 5 A A Ad. 347 ; 2 Nev. A M. 167 : 
A v. 2>wr f 1 JTi7., Wol. A Hod. 35 : B. v. Po/wwr, 6 A A A 1024 : as 
where a member of the court of magistrates was interested in the result 
of the trial: A v. Jones, 2 Har. A Wol. 293 (but see B. v. Fellows, 1 Ear. 
A Wol. 648 ; 4 Dowl. 607, confra) : or where a magistrate, in the com- 
mission for the county, was indicted at the quarter sessions and circu- 
lated among the other magistrates a printed account of the charges. 
A v. Grover, 8 Dowl. 325. So where the prosecutor or his solicitor is 
sheriff or under-sheriff, and could attend the grand jury when they con- 
sidered the bill (A v. Webb, 2 Str. 1068), the writ will be granted. Under 
some circumstances the court will grant a certiorari for the removal of an 
indictment for conspiracy: A v. WUks, 5 A A A 690; 25 L. J. (Q. B.) 
47 : A v. Bowlands, 17 Q. B. 671 ; 2 Den. 364 ; 21 L. J. (M. C.) 81, even 
where one of several defendants makes the application without the con- 
sent of the others. B. v. Foulkes, IL.M.A P. 720 ; 20 L. J. (M. C.) 196 ; 
A v. Boxall, 5 A. A E. 513 : A v. Probert, Dears. 30 : A v. Jewell, 7 
E. A A 140 ; 26 L. J. (Q. A) 177. In those cases the writ was allowed 
on the application of one of several defendants, who was a responsible 
person, he entering into a recognizance to pay costs in case of the con- 
viction of himself or of any of the other defendants. See Cr. Off. Bules, 
1886, r. 30, post, pp. 133, 134. 

In what cases refused.'] — An indictment for not repairing bridges and 
the highways at the end thereof, where the inhabitants of the county aro 
chargeable with the repair of the same, is not removable by certiorari, out 
of the county where such bridges or highways lie. 1 Anne, st. 1, c. 18, s. 5 : 
A v. Hamworth, 2 Str. 900 : A v. Cumberland, 6 T. A 194; 8 A A 149 ; 
3 A A P. 354 (B. L.). But this Act cannot apply where the indictment 
is of the innaDitante of the county from which the petty jury comes. 
See Short A Mellor, Cr. Off. Pr. 205. An indictment against any person 
for keeping a bawdy-house, gaming-house, or other disorderly house is 
not removable by certiorari at the instance of the defendant. 25 G. 2, 
c 36, s. 10. But where an indictment for keeping a disorderly house had 
been removed from the Middlesex Sessions to the Central Criminal 
Court, under 4 & 5 W. 4, c 36, *. 16, the court granted a certiorari to 
remove the indictment into the Queen's Bench at the instance of the 
defendant, holding that where the indictment has been once removed by 
the prosecutor, 25 O. 2, c 36, s. 10, which takes away the writ of certiorari, 
does not apply. B. v. Brier, 14 Q. A 568; 19 L. J. (M. C.) 121. If an 
indictment charging an offence in which the certiorari is taken away by 
statute contains counts charging an offence where it is not taken away, 
the writ may still issue. B. v. Saunders, 5 D.& A 611. 

The writ is rarely if ever issued to remove an indictment after judg- 
ment in the court below except for the purpose of carrying the judgment 
into execution {Short A Mellor, Cr. Off. Pr. 93), or as a step ancillary to 
the grant of a writ of error (post, ch. viii. sect. 2), which is the proper mode 
of questioning the legality of the judgment on an indictment : A v. 
Dixon, 6 Mod. 61, cited in A v. Nichols, 13 East, 412 n., 417 n. ; 12 A A 
486 : A v. Pennegoes, 1 A A C. 142 ; 25 A A 334: B. v. Lucas, 2 Fox A 
Sm. (K. A, Jr.) 80; ex parte Collins, Q. B. D., Dec. 19, 1899; 34 L. J. 
Newsp., 132. 

In Short A Mellor, Cr. Off. Pr. 93 n., reference is made to a suggestion 
in an unreporte4 case of A v. Boaler (1888), that the writ might lie where 



132 Indictment. 

error would not. But in R. v. Boeder [1892] 17 Cox, 569, it was held 
that certiorari will not go to the Central Criminal Court to bring up an 
indictment after judgment. In R. v. Seton, 7 T. R, 373 ; 4 R. R. 466, the 
court quashed a certiorari granted before, but not lodged till after judg- 
ment in an indictment for misdemeanor, and in R. v. Unwin, 7 DowL 578 
a certiorari was refused in a case where the defendant had surreptitiously 
scoured an acquittal by failing to give the notice of trial usual at the 
sessions where he was indicted. 

The court can grant, but usually refuses to issue, the writ for removal 
of an indictment for felony or misdemeanor after verdict and before 
judgment. 2 Hawk. c. 27, s. 28 : 1 Chit. Cr. L. 380 : R. v. Oxfordshire, 13 
East, 411 ; 12 R. R. 486 : R. v. Garside, 2 A. & K 266 : R. v. Nichols, ubi 
supra : R. v. Boater, 17 Cox, 569. 

The court will not, ordinarily, at the prayer of the defendant, grant a 
certiorari for the removal of an indictment for perjury, forgery at common 
law, or other heinous misdemeanor where the delay would tend to defeat 
the prosecution, 2 Hawk. c. 27, s. 28 : R. v. Pusey, 2 Str. Ill ; or for 
murder, R. v. Mead, 3 D. & R. 301 : R. v. Thomas, 4 M. <fc Sel. 442 ; 16 
R. R. 520; unnatural crime, R. v. Holden, 5 B. & Ad. 347 ; 2 Nev. <fc M. 
167, or the like. See R. v. Penprase, 4 B. <fe Ad. 573 ; 1 Nev. & M. 312. 
So the court will not, in general, except by the consent of the prose- 
cutor, remove an indictment from a court of competent jurisdiction where 
any of the Judges of the High Court preside. See R. v. Kingston (Duchess), 
1 Cowp. 283; 20 St. Tr. 355. The writ will not usually be granted to 
remove an indictment from the Central Criminal Court, or any other 
court in which judges of the Supreme Court sit, on the ground that a 
difficult question of law will arise : R. v. Templar, 1 Nev. <fc P. 91 : R. v. 
Wartnaby, ±A.& E, 435 ; and see Short & Mellor, Cr. Off. Pr. 96. 

Time when granted.] — The writ may be sued out in cases of misde- 
meanor, though at the time the indictment is not in esse; and it is 
sufficient if the indictment be found at any period before the writ is 
returnable. 60 G. 3, <fc 1 G. 4, c 4, s. 4. The proper time for either 
party to apply for a certiomri is before issue joined on the indictment : 
1 Chit. Cr. L. 880 ; but the certiorari is not too late, if delivered before 
the jury are sworn to try the case. 60 G. 3, c. 4, s. 3 (rep.): see R. v. 
Postman, 2 Dowl. 529 ; 1 A. & E. 603. 

Mode of obtaining the writ.'] — In all cases (except where the attorney- 
general applies for the writ on behalf of the crown) the application must 
ba founded upon affidavit, suggesting some adequate ground for removal. 
See ante, p. 130. 

The following form of an affidavit in support of an application for a 
certiorari to remove an indictment into the King's Bench Division, ia 
given in Appendix to Cr. Off. Rules, 1886, form 2:— 

In the High Court of Justice, 

Kim's Bench Division. 
I, A/JB., of, etc moke oath and say as follows : 

1. That at the general quarter sessions of the peace holden at 

in and for the county of , on or about the day of 

, a bill of indictment was preferred to the grand fury who 
returned a true bill [or that it is intended to prefer a bill of indictment, as 
the caeo may be]. 

2. That in my judgment and belief, nice and intricate questions or points 



Certiorari. 133 

of law v)3l arise on the trial of the said indictment, which will render it 
important that the same should be tried before one of the learned judges of the 
High Court of Justice, and particularly, that a question will, as 1 am 
advised, be raised as to whether [state the particular question that will 
arise, or that a question will arise upon the construction of an Act of 
Parliament]. 

3. That, in my judgment and belief, it will be material and necessary that 
the said indictment should be tried by a special jury, which cannot be had, 
unless the said indictment be removed into this honourable court. And that I 
[or as the case may be] will cause a special jury to be had if the said indict" 
ment shall be so removed, 

4. That I verily believe that it will be important and necessary that a view 
of the place and premises in question should be had by some of the jurymen 
to be impannelled, to try the issue joined upon the said indictment, which I 
am informed and believe can only be had by the said indictment being removed 
into this honourable court. 

[Note.— Where the view is to be had in the county where the bill is 
preferred certiorari is unnecessary. See R. v. Martin, L. R. 1 C. C. R. 
378 ,- 41 L. J. (M. C.) 113, and see post, p. 212.] 

5. That, by reason of [here state what has occurred to create prejudice], 
I verily believe that strong prejudices have been created in the minds of some 
of the justices who may preside at the sessions upon the trial of the said indict* 
ment. And also among that class of persons in the said place, from whom the 
common jurors are selected for the trials at the said sessions, and some of whom 
are likely to be called upon the jury for the trial of the said indictment, unless 
the same be removed into this honourable court. And therefore, that a fair 
and impartial trial of the same cannot be had at the said sessions. 

6. That [add any other allegation which may be likely to induce the 
court or a judge to grant the writ of certiorari, consistent with the faots 
and circumstances of the case required to be removed.] 

[Omit any of the foregoing allegations which may not be applicable to 
the case.] 

The affidavits, if sworn in England, must be sworn before a judge, 
district registrar, commissioner to administer oaths, see 52 & 53 Vict. c. 10 
{Commissioners for Oaths Act, 1889), first or second class clerk in the 
Crown Office Department, or officer empowered under the Rules of the 
Supreme Court to administer oaths. Cr. Off. Rules, 1886, r. 9. As to 
the persons before whom affidavits may be sworn out of England, see Id. 
r. 11. The affidavits must be entitled, " In the High Court of Justice, 
King's Bench Division." Id. r. 7. "Every application for a writ of 
certiorari, or for an order to remove an indictment found at the assizes 
into the King's Bench Division, at the instance of any person other than 
the attorney-general on behalf of the crown, shall, during the sittings, be 
made to a divisional court of the said division by motion for an order 
nisi to show cause, and in the vacation or when there is no sitting of a 
divisional court to a judge at chambers for a summons to show cause : 
Provided that where, from special circumstances, the court or a judge may 
be of opinion that the writ should issue forthwith, the order may be made 
absolute, or an order be made in the first instance, either ex parte or other- 
wise, as the court or judge may direct." Cr. Off. Rules, 1886, r. 28. No 
summons to show cause before a judge at chambers shall be issued for a 
writ of certiorari without the leave of a judge upon an ex parte application. 
Id. r. 305- For forms of summonses at chambers, see Appendix to Cr. Off. 
Rules, 1886, Forms 3 <fc 5, and for form of judge's order for certiorari to 
remove indictment into the King's Bench Division, see Id. Form 4; and 



134 Indictment. 

for form of judge s order to remove indictment from assizes or Central 
Criminal Court into the King's Bench Division, see Id. Form 6. 

Allowance*] — " No writ of certiorari for the removal of an indictment, or 
order to remove an indictment found at the assizes, shall be allowed by 
the court to whom it may be directed, unless the person (other than the 
attorney-general aoting on behalf of the crown and the prosecutor of 
an indictment against a body corporate) at whose instance it has been 
issued shall have entered into a recognizance by himself, if he is the 
prosecutor, with sufficient sureties, conditioned on the return of such 
writ to make up the record, and give notice of trial and proceed to trial 
of the indictment at the next assizes to be held for the county wherein 
the indictment was found, or if in London or Middlesex forthwith at the 
sittings of the High Court of Justice, and to pay the costs of tho defen- 
dant subsequent to the removal of the indictment, if he be acquitted ; 
and if the party removing is the defendant, until he shall have entered 
into a recognizance with sufficient sureties conditioned to appear and 
plead (and in cases of felony in open court) to the said indictment, and 
give notice of trial, and proceed to trial of the indictment at the next 
assizes to be held for the county wherein the indictment was found, or if 
in London or Middlesex forthwith at the sittings of the High Court of 
Justice, and personally to appear from day to day at the trial of such 
indictment, and if necessary in the King's Bonch Division of the High 
Court of Justice, and not depart till he shall be discharged by the court, 
and to pay the costs of the prosecution subsequent to the removal of tho 
indictment, if the defendant or any of the defendants, if more than one, 
be convicted." Cr. Off. Rules, 1886, r. 30. A certiorari obtained by one 
of several co-defendants removes the indictment as to all. B. v. Boxall, 
1A.&E. 513. 

This rule generalizes a provision made as to certain misdemeanors 
by 21 Jas. 1, c. 8, s. 4, and as to appeals from judgments and orders of 
quarter sessions by 5 O. % c. 19, ss. 2, 3. 

On removing an indictment containing seven counts into the High 
Court, tho prosecutors bound themselves to pay the defendant's costs if 
she were acquitted on the indictment Defendant having been acquitted 
on five out of the seven counts, it was held that this was not an acquittal 
upon the indictment within the meaning of the recognizance, and that 
she could not claim her costs of the counts on which she had been 
acquitted. B. v. Bayard [1892] 2 Q. B. 181 ; 17 Cox, 502. 

" If the person at whose instance any writ of certiorari for the romoval 
of an indictment, or order to remove an indictment found at the assizes, 
shall have been awarded, shall not before the allowance thereof enter 
into a properly conditioned recognizance, the court to which such writ 
or order may be directed shall proceed to the trial of the indictment, as if 
such writ or order had not been awarded." Cr. Off. Bules, 1886, r. 31. 

The "allowance" of the writ mentioned in this rule means by the 
person to whom it is directed. B. v. Abergele, 5 A. <£• E. 795 : B. v. 
Dunn, 8 T. B. 217 : B. v. Jones, 9 Bowl. 504. 

When the certiwari is granted, the divisional court or judge at 
chambers on granting it fixes the amount of the recognizances (to be 
entered into before a judge, or a justice of the county or place in which 
the party resides), and the amount of the recognizances is indorsed 
on the writ. By r. 80, supra, the prosecutor of an indictment against 
a body corporate is not bound to enter into recognizances on the removal 
of an indictment by certiorari, because the corporation can plead only in 
the High Court. B. v. BirmingJiam and Gloucester Bail. Co., 9 C. & P . 



Certiorari, 135 

469. The rale in this respect follows the construction put upon 16 <& 17 
Vict. c. 30, s. 5 (rep.), in R. v. Mayor, etc., of Manchester, 1 E.& B. 453 ; 
26 L. J. (M. ft) 65. As to the mode of entering into recognizances when 
they are required from a parish, etc., or other such large quasi corporate 
body, see R. v. Abergele, 5 A. A E. 795. When they are required from a 
corporation, it is the practice to allow one of the members of the corpora- 
tion, on behalf of himself and the rest of the corporation, to enter into 
the recognizance, with such sureties as may be required. Short <& MeUor 9 
Cr. Off. Pr. 17. 

For the forms of recognizances by prosecutor and defendant on <vn- 
tiorari to remove indictment into the King's Bench Division, see Cr. 
Off. Rules, 1886, Forms 10, 11. 

The following is the form of the rule to compel the defendant to put in 
better bail : — 

The King Unless the defendant shall put in better bail within four days 
against next after notice of this rule to him or his attorney given, let 

A. B. a procedendo issue. 

Alverstoke. 

The recognizance must be lodged, together with the writ, with the 
clerk of the peace or clerk of assize, as the case may be ; and after they 
are lodged all proceedings upon the indictment in the court below are 
stayed. 

** All recognizances to be entered into for the allowance of any writ of 
certiorari, or order to remove an indictment found at the assizes, or any 
writ of certiorari for the removal of any order, conviction, inquisition, or 
other proceeding removed thereby, shall be certified into the King's 
Bench Division with the writ of certiorari or order of removal." Cr. Off. 
Rules, 1886, r. 82. The recognizance when acknowledged must be trans- 
mitted to and filed in the Grown Office. Cr. Off. Rules, 1886, r. 128. 

Where a defendant has entered into insufficient recognizances, the 
court will discharge them, and compel him to give better security. V/. 
v. Hooper, 1 Chit. Rep. (K. B.) 491. 

Return to writ.}— The return is made by indorsing on the writ of 
certiorari the following memorandum : — The execution of this writ appears 
by the schedules hereunto annexed. The answer of A. B., Esquire, one of the 
keepers of the peace and justices within mentioned. This memorandum must 
be signed and sealed by A. B. The schedules mentioned in it as there- 
unto annexed, are the indictment and other documents to be returned 
in pursuance of the certiorari. See Appendix to Cr. Of. Rules, 1886, 
Form 21. 

Sending back the record.]— It the writ of certiorari has been improvidently 
issued, ejj n if it appears to have been obtained by misrepresentation of 
the facts, the court (or a judge at chambers, R. v. Scaife, 18 Q. B. 773; 2 
Den. 513 ; 3 C. & K. 211 ; 21 L. J. (M. C.) 221) may award a writ of 
supersedeas to the certiorari and a procedendo to carryback the indictment, 
and so send back the record to the original jurisdiction, there to be dealt 
with as if no certiorari had issued. See 1 Bum's J. 648 (80th ed.) ; 4 Co. 
Inst. 67. The same course may be taken if the defendant neglects to 
perform the condition of the recognizance, or if bad or insufficient bail 
be put in. R. v. Jones, 9 Bowl. 504: R. v. Dunn, 8 T. R. 217; R. v. 
Abergele, h A. & E. 795; Com. Dig. Certiorari (0.); 1 Chitty Cr. L. 397. 
And where the defendants in a case originally removed from quarter 



136 Indictment, 

cessions by certiorari, having obtained a rale in the Queen's Bench for A 
new trial, neglected to bring down the record and proceed to trial at the 
assizes, a writ of procedendo was awarded, and the record was sent back 
to sessions, where the parties were tried and sentenced to transportation. 
R. v. Scaife, ubi supra. 

For the form of writ of supersedeas to certiorari and procedendo to carry 
back indictment, see Appendix to Cr. Off. Rules, 1886, Form 169. 

Trial at Central Criminal Court of indictments removed by certiorari.]— 
By 19 <fe 20 Vict, c 16, s. 1 (" Palmer's Act "), the conrt of King's Bench in 
term time, or any judge thereof in vacation, is authorized, whenever any 
indictment or inquisition for any felony or misdemeanor committed or 
supposed to have been committed at any place out of the jurisdiction of the 
Central Criminal Court shall have been removed by certiorari in the King's 
Bench, to order, if it appear to be expedient to the ends of justice, that 
such indictment or inquisition shall be tried at the Central Criminal Court. 
Or such court or judge may, in any such case of felony or misdemeanor, 
order a certiorari to issue to the court before which the indictment or 
inquisition shall be pending, or shall thereafter be found, or to the coroner 
before whom such inquisition shall have been or shall thereafter he taken, 
to remove the indictment or inquisition directly into the Central Criminal 
Court («. 3). Provisions are mado for the transmission of the indictment 
or inquisition, and for the return of the recognizances, depositions, etc., 
into that court (ss. 2, 4) ; for the removal of the offender to the prison 
appointed for the Central Criminal Court (s. 5); for his arraignment, 
pleading and trial at the Central Criminal Court (19 & 20 Vict. c. 16, ss. 
6, 7) ; for the allowance of the expenses of proseontions(«. 13) ; and other- 
wise in relation to the objects of the Act. The powers of the Conrt of 
King's Bench were transferred to the High Court of Justice (King's Bench 
Division) by 36 <fc 37 Vict. c. 66, s. 34. The court has refused to make it 
a condition, under 19 <fc 20 Vict. c. 16, s. 24 (rep. and superseded by Cr. 
Off. Rules, 1886, r. 30), that the prosecutor should furnish the defendant 
with evidence which it was suggested had been obtained by the prose- 
cutor since the depositions were taken. R. v. Palmer, 5 E. & B. 1024. 

" An application for an order that an indictment or inquisition removed 
into the King's Bench Division shall be tried at the Central Criminal 
Court, or a motion to remove an indictment or inquisition by certiorari 
into tho Central Criminal Court for trial under 19 & 20 Vict, c. 16, shall, 
during the sittings, be made to the King's Bench Division by motion for 
an order nisi: and in the vacation, where there is no sitting of a divi- 
sional court, to a judge at chambers for a summons; and the order may 
be made absolute or granted upon such terms as to recognizance or 
otherwise as the court or judge may consider reasonable." Cr. Off. Rules, 
1886, r. 42. No appeal lies from the refusal of the King's Bench Division 
to grant a certiorari to remove an indictment to the Central Criminal 
Court under 19 & 20 Viet. c. 16. R. v. Rudge, 16 Q. B. D. 469; 55 L. J. 
(Jf. C.) 112. 

Costs in certiorari.] — The provisions of 7 O. 4, c 64, jowl, ch. vi., Costs, 
do not apply to the costs incurred on an indictment removed by certiorari. 
R. v. Richards, 2 Man. & Ry. 405 ; SB. & C. 420 : R. v. Johnson, 1 Mood. 
C, C. 173 ; R. v. Treasurer of Exeter, 5 Man. & Ry. 167. See post, ch. vi., 
Costs. The liability to costs on the removal of an indictment by certiorari 
was first imposed by 21 Jas. 1, c. 8, s. 4, and 5 & 6 W.&M. c. 11, s. 3 {rep.), 
and was extended by 16 & 17 Vict. c. 80, *. 5 (rep.). It is now regulated 
by Cr. Off. Rules, 1886, r. 30 (ante, p. 134). Under 16 & 17 Vict. c. 30, 



Certiorari — Costs, 137 

9. 5, it was held that the prosecutor is entitled to costs in the case of an 
indictment removed by the defendant by certiorari, where the defendant 
in convicted, though the prosecutor is not the party grieved or injured. 
B. v. Oastier, L. B. 9 Q. B. 132 ; 43 L. J. (Q. B.) 42 ; and as *. 5 is embodied 
in Cr. Off. Mules, 1886, r. 80 {ante, p. 134), B. v. Oastier would be an 
authority on the construction of that rule. But a defendant who removes 
the indictment is not liable to costs, although ho be found guilty by a 
jury, if judgment be arrested. B. v. Turner, 15 East, 570. [As to costs 
where a new trial is ordered, see post, ch. viii. s. 4.] If a defendant die 
after verdict and before judgment, his bail will be liable for the costs to 
the extent of their recognizances ; B. v. Turner, 3 B. <fc C. 160 : B. v. 
Finnwre, 8 T. B. 409 ; but under ordinary circumstances the prosecutor 
is not entitled to costs till the court has pronounced judgment, for it may 
be that judgment will be arrested. B. v. Turner, 15 East, 570. If an 
indictment against several defendants be removed into the King's Bench 
Division without the consent of all of them, those who did not consent 
to the application for the certiorari are not liable for the costs, even 
though they have pleaded to the indictment and have been convicted 
upon it R. v. Hassell, 5 Dowh 531. Bat under 16 & 17 Vict. c. 30, s. 5 

Srep.), where the certiorari was applied for at the instance of one of two 
iefendants, the judge might in his discretion make it a condition of the 
recognizance that the defendant applying for the writ should pay the 
prosecutor's costs, in case either he or the other defendant should be 
convicted, B. v. Jewell, 7E.&B. 140 ; 26 L. J. (Q. B.) 177 ; and an « xpress 
provision to that effect is contained in Cr. Off. Rules, 1886, r. 30 (ante, 
p. 134). The prosecutor is not entitled to the costs of any counts 
of the indictment on which the defendant has been acquitted, B. v. 
Hawdon, 11 A. & E. 143, nor to costs incurred prior to the certiorari. 
R.y. Passman, 1 A. & E. 603, 606, n. : B. v. Higgins, 5 Dowl. 875; 6 L. J. 
(Af. C.) 9. The defendant is to pay all reasonable costs occasioned by the 
removal of the indictment by the certiorari, or incurred in consequence of 
it, in order to carry the prosecution to its legal conclusion ; B. v. Utibie, 
5 M. & Sel. 520; and the amount of costs is not limited by the recog- 
nizance. B. v. Teal, 13 East, 4 ; 10 B. B. 516. If a prosecutor, being 
entitled to costs, die after taxation of costs, his personal representatives 
are entitled to them. 

The prosecutor's liability to pay costs to the defendant, if acquitted, 
only arises where the prosecutor has entered into the recognizance with 
the condition mentioned in r. 30 of the Cr. Off. BuJes, 1886 (ante, p. 134). 
To entitle the defendant to costs he must be acquitted on all counts of 
the indictment. B. v. Bayard [1892], 2 Q. B. 181 ; 17 Cox, 572. If the 
prosecutor has merely entered into a recognizance conditioned to prose- 
cute with effect, and to do and perform such orders and things as the 
court shall direct, he is not liable to costs. B. v. East Stoke, 6 B. & S. 
536; 34 7,. J.(M. C.) 190. 

. The costs are now taxed in the Supreme Court Taxing Office, and 
payment is enforced by estreat of the recognizances under Cr. Off. 
Bides, 124, 126, which is effected by order of the court made after calling 
upon the party liable to perform the conditions. 16 & 17 Vict. c. 30, s. 6, 
which permitted attachment, was repealed in 1892. As to costs of special 
jury, see B. v. Moate, SB.it Ad. 237 ; 1 L. J. K. B. 78 ; 37 B. B. 421. 

As to the cases in which the defendant may, by reason of poverty or 
bankruptcy, have relief from the payment of the costs, see R. v. Thornton, 
4 Ex. 820; 19 L. J. (M. C.) 113 : B. v. Hills, 2 E. & B. 176; 22 L. J. 
(0. £.) 322. 

As to the costs in cases where the indictment, after its removal by 



138 Indictment. 

certiorari, is tried at tho Cintral Criminal Court, under 19 <fe 20 Vict, 
c. 16, ss. 25, 26, see post, eh. vi., Costs. 

Change of iwwe.]— The removal of an indictment by certiorari at 
common law does no more than change the court of trial, and does not 
affect the venue. The original practice was to try the indictment at bar 
in the Court of King's Bench, unless after issue joined a writ of nisiprius 
were issued with the attorney-general's consent to try in the proper 
county. 2 Co. Inst 421. The court was by 6 Hen. 8, c. 6 empowered 
thus to remit indictments of felonies. In the case of an offence com- 
mitted outside the Central Criminal Cjurt District, if it is desired to 
change the venue, this can be effected by obtaining an order under 19 <fc 20 
Vict. c. 16, a. 3, for the trial of the offence in that court. On the removal 
of a case from that court the venue is determined by the court on issuing 
the certiorari and stated in the writ. Cr. Off. Rules, 1886, r. 41, which 
provides that "every writ of certiorari for removing an indictment from 
the Central Criminal Court shall specify the county or jurisdiction in 
which the same shall be tried; and a jury shall be summoned, and the 
trial proceed, in the same manner in all respects as if the indictment hai 
been originally preferred in that county or jurisdiction." The true con- 
struction of this rule is, that the King's Bench Division has discretion to 
name in the certiorari the county or jurisdiction in which tho trial is to 
take place, and that by the jurors summoned from that jurisdiction the 
same issues shall be tried that would have been tried in the Central 
Criminal (burt had the indictment not been removed. R. v. Castro, L. R. 
9 Q. B. 350, 355 ; 43 L. J. (Q. B.) 105, 107. 

In cases not dealt with as above it is necessary to obtain an order to 
change the venue, which may be made by a judge of assize without 
certiorari, or by the King's Bench Division after the grant of a certiorari 
and joinder of issue. Short <fe MeUor, Cr. Off. Pr. 201. The right to 
make such an order appears to be established as to felonies. See R. v. 
Penprase, 4 B. & Aid. 573 : R. v. Holden, 5 B. & Ad.ZVl ; and R. v. Barrett, 
Jr. Rep., 4 C. L. 285 : 18 W. R. 671 : R. v. Fay, Jr. Rep. 6 C. L. 436 : 
R. v. M'Eneany [1878] 2 L. R. Ir. 236 : R. v. Phelan, 14 Cox, 679 (Ir.). 
And it is certainly established as to misdemeanors. But it is not exercised 
unless (1) demanded as of right by the attorney-general acting on 
behalf of the crown ; (2) the inhabitants of a county are indicted and 
all are interested in the verdict: R. v. Southampton {Inhabitants), 17 
Q. B. D. 424; (8) a view in another county is necessary: Clerk v. R. 
9 //. L. C. 184: 31 L. J. (Q. B.) 175; R. v. Sheldon, 32 L. T. (N. S.) 27; 
or (4) a fair trial cannot be had in the original venue. R. v. Simpson, 

5 Jur. 462: R. v. Dunn, 11 Jur. 237: R. v. Patent Eureka Co., 13 L. T., 
N. S. 865 : R. v. Hunt, SB.& Aid. 444; 2 Chit. Rep. (K. B.) 130 ; R. v. 
Harris, 3 Burr. 1330 : R. v. Duggan, Ir. Rep. 7 C. L. 94 ; R. v. Boughton 
[1895] 2 Ir. Rep. 386. Mere possibility of prejudice is not a sufficient 
reason for change of venue. R. v. King, 2 Chit. Rep. (K. B.) 217 : R. v. 
Stephenson, 5 Jur. 311. Any extra expense caused by the change falls on 
the person who applies for it R. v. Jsewton, 1 Cox, 195. It is usual, but 
not necessary, to change the venue to the nearest county on the same 
circuit in which a fair trial can be had. Anon., 6 Jur. 131 : R. v. Browne, 

6 Jur. 168 : R. v. Palmer, 5 E. & B. 1021, 1028; Campbell, L. C. J. Set. 
Short & Mellor, Cr. Off. Pr. 201. As to the trial in a county at large of 
offences committed in counties of cities, see ante, p. 44. An application 
to change the venue is made during the sittings to a Divisional Court of 
the King's Bench Division, in vacation to a judge. Short A- Mellor, Cr. Of. 
Pr. 205. 



Nolle Prose-jut. 139 

Trial at Ikir.]— Where an indictment has been removed by certiorari 
into the King's Bench Division the attorney-general, if prosecuting on 
behalf of the crown, has the right to demand a trial at bar ; R. v. Hales, 
2 Sir. 816 : B. v. Castro, L. B. 9 Q. B. 350 ; bnt not where he applies 
merely as counsel for a private prosecutor. B. v. Hales, ubi supra. See 
Dixon v. Farrer, 17 Q. B. D., pp. 666, 667, per Will*, J. The most recent 
instances of trials at bar are R. v. Jameson [1896] 2 Q. B. 425 : 65 L. J. 
(M. G.) 2ia In B. y. Lynch [1903] 1 K. B. 744, no demand was made 
by the attorney-general for a trial at bar, as treason committed abroad is 
triable before the King's Bench Division under 35 Hen. 8, c. 2, s. 1. 



Sect. 14. 
nolle prosequi. 



A nolle prosequi to stay proceedings upon an indictment or information 
pending in any court may be entered, by leave of the attorney-general, 
at the instance of either the prosecutor or the defendant, at any time 
after the bill of indictment is found, and before judgment. R. v. Dunn, 
IC.&K. 730 ; B. v. Colling, 2 Cox, 184. " This power of the attorney- 
general is not subject to any control by the courts ; but does not interfere 
with the right of a judge to allow a case to be withdrawn on the applica- 
tion of a private prosecutor." B~ v. Comptroller of Patents [1899] 1 Q. B. 
909, 914, per Smith, L. J. If the office of attorney-general is vacant, 
senile that the solicitor-general may give leave to enter a nolle prosequi ; 
Id., and see 42 <fc 43 Vict. c. 22, s. 9. Leave is never given except upon 
good cause shown, and it is never refused when the interests of justice 
require it. It is distinct from and has not the same effect as offering no 
evidence and submitting to acquittal. El worthy v. Bird, 2 Bing. 258: 
9 Moore C. P. 430. It appears to be preferable to an application to dis- 
charge the recognizances of the prosecutor and witnesses. See R. v. 
Frtaldey, 6 Cox, 75. The following is the form of tho attorney-general's 
fiat or warrant to the coroner and attorney of the King's Bench Division 
to enter a nolle prosequi, in order to admit a prisoner, indicted for a 
conspiracy, as a witness for the crown : — 

Whereas at the general quarter sessions of the peace holden for the West 

Riding of tlie county of York, etc., an indictment was found by the grand 

jury of the said Biding against H. S., T. S., G. E. and S. C, for a conspiracy 

falsely to charge J. H. to he the father of a bastard child, whereof the said II. 8. 

teas pregnant, which indictment has since been removed into the King's Bench 

Dioition of his Majesty's High Court of Justice ; and whereas it is represented 

to me on the part of the prosecutor of the said indictment, that he considering 

that the said H. 8. was rather an object of the conspiracy of the other cfr- 

fcndanU than a willing actress in it, and from recent information that she is 

comparatively innocent ; and considering that the ends of justice would be best 

answered were she in a situation to undergo examination as a witness upon 

the subject-matter of the indictment, is desirous, with the advice of his counsel, 

to have a nolle prosequi entered as against the said H. 8., and that he prays 

the same accordingly ; these are therefore to authorize and require you to enter 

or cause to be entered a nolle prosequi upon the said indictment as to the said 

H. 8. And for so doing this shall be your warrant. Dated, etc. 

To J. B. M., Esq., coroner and attorney of the King's Bench Division of 

his Majesty's High Court of Justice. 



140 Indictment. 

Where the application is made at the instance of the prosecutor, the 
opinion of counsel as to the desirability of having the defendant examined 
as a witness is laid before the attorney-general, who will order the nolle 
prosequi to be entered without issuing any summons to the defendant : 
but where the application proceeds from the defendant, the attorney- 
general will direct his clerk to summon the prosecutor to show cause 
before him at his chambers why proceedings should not be stayed, and 
on hearing the parties grant his warrant, if he thinks the circumstances 
of the case demand it. 

The attorney-general may, however, on an ex parte application by 
the defendant, and without calling the prosecutor before him, enter a 
nolle prosequi to an indictment. It. v. Allen, 1 B. <fc S. 850 ; 31 L. J. 
( Jf. C.) 129. 

The usual occasion of granting a nolle prosequi is either where in cases 
of misdemeanor a civil action is depending tor the same cause ; R. v. 
Fielding, 2 Burr. 719 ; Jones v. Clay, 1 B. & P. 191 ; or where any 
improper and vexatious attempts are made to oppress the defendant, as 
by repeatedly preferring defective indictments for the same supposed 
offence; It. v. Querchy, 1 W. Bl. 515 ; or if it be clear that an indictment 
is not sustainable against the defendant. R. v. Pond, 1 Comyns Rep. 312 ; 
1 Cliitty Cr. L. 479. Where an indictment is preferred against a defen- 
dant for an assault, and at the same time an action of trespass is com- 
menced in one of the civil courts for identically the same assault, upon 
affidavit of the facts, and hearing the parties, the attorney-general will, 
if ho sees fit, order a nolle prosequi to .be entered to the indictment, or 
compel the prosecutor to elect whether he will pursue the criminal or 
civil remedy. R. v. Fielding, 2 Burr. 719 ; 1 Chitty Cr. L. 479. 

The following may be the form of the affidavit in such a case : — 

I, A. B., of the parish of , in tfie county of , etc., make oath and 

say, that J, this deponent, did see the clerk of the peace of the county of 

sign a certificate hereto annexed, on the day of f at , and that 

since [or before"] the time of preferring the indictment, in the said certificate 
mentioned, I was served with a copy of a writ of summons, issuing <mt of the 
King's Bench Division of his Majesty's High Court of Justice, at the suit of 
0. D., the prosecutor of the said indictment, requiring me within eight days to 
cause an appearance to be entered for me in the said King's Bench Division, 

in an action of trespass at the suit of the said 0. D. ; and that on the 

day of I, this deponent, did receive a notice of a declaration being filed 

against me at the suit of the said C. D., the prosecutor of the said indictment, 
in the master's office of the said King's Bench Division, for assaulting him, 
the said G. D., which said declaration and indict ment, 1 say, are for the same 
assault and not for different offences. 

A certificate from the clerk of assize or clerk of the peace, stating the 
substance of the indictment, and the time when it was preferred, must 
be annexed to this affidavit. Cro. Circ. Comp. 25 (10th ed.). Forjorm of 
certificate, see ante, p. 105). And if the attorney-general think the case a 
proper one for his interference, he will sign a warrant under his hand and 
seal, directed to the clerk of the peace, if the indictment has been found 
at sessions, directing him to enter a stet processus. R. v. Fielding, 2 Burr. 
719 : Jones v. Clay, 1 B. & P. 191. If the cause of the application be the 
vexatious conduct of the prosecutor, the attorney-general may direct the 
proceedings to be removed into the King's Bench Division, where counsel 
will bo heard in support of the nolle prosequi. R. v. Querchy, 1 W. Bl. 
545. A nolle prosequi may be entered as to one of several defendants at 



Nolle Prosequi, 141 

any time before trial. B. v. Teal, 11 Fast, 307. And on motion for a new 
trial in the King's Bench on an indictment for a conspiracy against 
several defendants, the counsel for the crown, at the suggestion of the 
court, and having received the assent of the attorney-general (the attorney- 
general appearing as counsel for one of the defendants), entered a nolle 
prosequi as to two defendants, when the rule for a new trial was refused 
as to the rest ; R. v. Rowlands, 17 Q. B. 671, 685 ; 2 Den. 364 ; 21 L. J. 
(M. C.) 81 ; and see R. v. Hempstead, R. <fc R. 344 ; and R. v. Butterworth, 
R. & R. 520. In R. v. Leatham, 30 L. J. (Q. B.) 205 : 8 Cox, 498 ; 3E.&E. 
658; when the defendant had been found guilty on several counts of an 
information for bribery, the solicitor-general entered a nolle prosequi on one 
of them after a rule nisi for a new trial : and in R. v. Rowlands, ubi supra, 
on application for a rule nisi to arrest the judgment on an indictment 
for a conspiracy, a nolle prosequi was entered on three counts of an indict- 
ment, as to the sufficiency of which some doubts were entertained, and 
the court pronounced judgment on the remaining good counts, a verdict 
having been taken on each count The following is the form of entering 
a nolle prosequi on record, given in Appendix to Cr. Off. Rules, 1886, 
Form 120 :— 

Aflerwards on the day of , before our said lord the King at the 

Royal Courts of Justice, London, come as will the said coroner and attorney 
of our said lord the King, in the King's Bench Division of his Majesty's High 
Court of Justice, who for our said lord the King in this behalf prosecutes in 
his proper person, as the said A. B. by his solicitor. And the said coroner 
and attorney for our said lord the King says that he will not further prosecute 
(ait se nolle ulterius prosequi) the said A. B. upon the indictment [or infor- 
mation] aforesaid. Whereupon all and singular the premises being seen and 
fully understood by the court now here, it is considered and adjudged, by the 
said court here, that all proceedings upon the said indictment [or information] 
against the said A. B. be altogether stayed, and that the said A. B. be discharged 
of and from the said indictment [or information]. 

[Note. — In the case of an information filed by the attorney-general, his 
name must be used instead of that of the King's coroner and attorney.] 

A nolle prosequi puts an end to the prosecution (see Gilchrist v. Gardner, 
12 N. S. TV. Rep. (Law) 184, and English authorities there cited) but 
does not operate as a bar or discharge or an acquittal on the merits. 
Goddard v. Smith, 6 Mod. 261: 3 Salk. 215: R. v. Ridpath, 10 Mod. 152; 
and the party remains liable to be re-indicted. It has been said that 
fresh process may be awarded on the same indictment. Goddard v. Smith, 
ubi supra ; Com* Dig. Indict. (K) : but this dictum appears not to be law. 
See the judgment in R. v. Allen, 1 B. & S. 850; 31 L. J. (M. C.) 129 ; R. 
v. Mitchell Cox, 93; 6 St. Tr., N. S. 545; and Short & Mellor, Crown 
Office Practice, 249. 



( U2 ) 



CHAPTER II. 

INFORMATION. 

Sbct. 1. Preliminary, p. 142. 

2. Information ex officio, p. 142. 

8. Information by the Master of the Crown Office, p. 144. 



Sect. 1. 
pbeliminart. 



Prosecutions by information in respect of indictable misdemeanors 
or upon penal statutes, are not now in use before courts of oyer and 
terminer, or gaol delivery, or before courts of quarter sessions (Archbold, 
Quarter Sessions (5th ed.) 292). Informations on penal statutes are subject 
to the provisions of 18 Eliz. c. 5, and 31 Eliz. c. 5, except whore the 
proceedings are of a civil nature, or are taken under the Summary 
Jurisdiction Acts. Informations for misdemeanor are still occasionally 
laid before the K. B. D. of the High Court. These are dealt with in sects. 
2 & 3, post. Informations in that court in customs and revenue cases 
are now treated as civil proceedings for purposes of evidence : see the 
Crown Suits Act, 1865 (28 & 29 Vict. c. 104), s. 84 (whioh got rid of 
doubts expressed in Att.-Gen. v. Badloff, 10 Ex. 84 : 23 L. J. (Ex.) 240), 
and s. 259 of the Customs Consolidation Act, 1876 (89 <fc 40 Vict. c. 36). 
Informations in quo warranto, are now civil proceedings : 47 <fc 48 Vict, 
c. 61, s. 15. 



Sect. 2. 
information ex officio. 

What and in what cases.'] — The information ex officio is a formal written 
suggestion on behalf of the King of a misdemeanor committed filed by 
the King's attorney-general (or, in the vacancy of that office, by the 
solicitor-general, B. v. Wilkes, 4 Burr, 2527; 19 St. Tr. 1075; 2 Eng. 
Bep. 244 ; 4 Bro. P. C. 360) in the King's Bench Division of the High 
Court of Justice, without the intervention of a grand jury. The 
attorney-general for the Duchy of Lancaster cannot file an ex officio 
information in the High Court Att.-Qen. of Duchy of Lancaster v. Duke 
of Devonshire, 14 Q. B. D. 195: 54 L. J. (Q. B.) 271. 

It lies at common law for misdemeanors only, and not for treason or 
felony ; Com. Dig. Information (A. 1) : B. v. Prynn, 5 Mod. 459 : B. v. 
Berchet, 1 Show. 106 : jB. v. Magee, Bowe (Ir. K. B.) 416 ; nor for misprision 
of treason : for wherever any capital offence is charged, or an offence so 
highly penal as misprision of treason, the law of England requires that 



Ex Officio. 143 

the accusation should bo warranted by the oath of twelve men, before 

the defendant be put to answer it : 2 Hawk. c. 26 s. 3. The usual objects 

of an information ex officio are properly such enormous misdemeanors 

as peculiarly tend to disturb or endanger the King's government, or to 

molest or affront him in the regular discharge of his royal functions ; 

4 BL Com. 3C8; such, for instance, as seditious or blasphemous writings 

or speeches (R. v. Home, 2 Cowp. 672 : 20 St. Ir. 651 : R. v. Wilkes, ubi 

supra : R. v. Burdett, 1 St. Tr., 2V. 8. 1 : R. Y. l Waddington, 1 St. Tr., N. & 

1339 ; 1 B. & C. 26 : R. v. Mary Ann Carlile, 1 St. Tr., N. 8. 1088) ; seditious 

riots not amounting to high treason ; libels upon the King or his ministers, 

the judges, or other high officers, reflecting upon their conduct in the 

execution of their official duties (R. v. Harvey, 2 St. Tr., N. 8.1: R. v. 

Hunt, 31 St. Tr. 367, 408 : R. v. Lord George Gordon, 22 Id. 177) ; libels 

on foreign sovereigns or ambassadors (R. v. Peltier, 28 St. Tr. 529: 

R. t. Vint, 27 Id. 627) ; obstructing public officers in the execution of 

their duties; obstructing the King's officers in the collection, etc., of the 

revenues ; bribery at parliamentary elections (R. v. Leatham, 8 Cox, 425, 498 : 

R. v. Charlesworth, 1 B. & S. 460) ; bribery, corrupt or oppressive conduct 

or neglect of duty by magistrates and public officials (R. v. Pinney, 3 St. 

Tr., N. 8. 11) ; or against public officials for misconduct outside Great 

Britain. See 11 & 12 W. 3, c. 12 ; 42 G. 8, c. 85 : R. v, Shawe, 5 M.& Sel. 

403 ; 17 R. R. 370 : R. v. Turner [1889] 24 L. J. Newsp. 466, 469, 479. 

In R. T. Brown and others, Q. B. Feb. 1858 ; 7 Cox, 442 ; sab nom. R. v. 

Ksdaile, IF.&F. 213, informations ex officio were filed against directors 

of a banking company, for a conspiracy to defraud the shareholders by 

false reports of the pecuniary condition of the bank and otherwise. In 

R. v. Parnell, 14 Cox, 508, an ex officio information was laid in Ireland 

for conspiracy to commit an offence against the State. Ex officio 

informations are now rarely filed in England. The latest was R. v. Cate 

& Tarry, 9 July, 1887, for a libel imputing corruptibility to the Middlesex 

Justices. 

Form.] — The form of an information ex officio is thus : 

Middlesex, to wit: — Be it remembered that Sir R. B. F., knight, 

attorney-general of our present sovereign lord the King, who for our said 

lord the King in this behalf prosecutes in his own proper person, comes here 

into court, before the King himsdf, at the Royal Courts of Justice, London, 

on the day of , 190 — . And for our said lord the King gives the 

court here to understand and be informed, that [state offence and then 
proceed in the same manner as if it were an indictment.] Second 
Count. — And the said attorney-general of our said lord the King, for our 
said lord the King, further gives the court here to understand and be informed 
that, etc To conclude : — Whereupon the said attorney-general for our said 
lord the King prays the consideration of the court here in the premises, and 
that due process of law may be awarded against him, the said B. G. t in this 
behalf to make him answer to our said lord the King touching and concerning 
the premises aforesaid. 

Filing.']— This information is filed in the crown office, without any 
leave previously obtained of the court for that purpose ; and the court 
will not entertain a motion by the attorney-general for a criminal 
information at the suit of the crown ; R. v. Philipps, 3 Burr. 1564: R. v. 
Phillips, 4 Burr. 2089; 1 Beacon, Cr. Law, 672 n. ; R. v. Magee, Rowe (Jr. 
K. B.) 416 ; nor will the court, upon the application of the defendant, 
restrain the attorney-general from filing an ex officio information upon 
the ground that a criminal information has already been granted for the 



144 Information, 

same cause, R. t. .4tecander, Jtffif., 2£ 7. 1830. Bat in that cage, after 
both informations had been filed, the court stayed the criminal information 
until farther order. See post, p. 152. 

Quashing.]— The court .will not quash an ex officio information at the 
instance of the prosecutor, because the attorney-general may, if he will, 
enter a nolle prosequi; R. v. Stratton, 1 Doug. 239; and even upon the 
motion of the defendant, they will seldom quash it, but will generally 
put the defendant to demur, etc. ; see Com. Dig. Information (D. 4) ; R. v. 
Gregory, 1 Salk. 372. After demurrer the information may be amended. 
R. v. Holland, 4 2 1 . R. 457 ; 2 R. R. 439. The attorney-general is also 
entitled as of right to amend the information on paying costs. Att.-Gen. 
v. Rag, 11 M. & W. 464. 

Procedure.]— When the information has Jpeen filed, the defendant, after 
appearance, upon application to the court, is entitled to a copy of it free 
of expense. 60 G. 3 & 1 G. 4, c. 4, a. 8. This provision applies also to 
indictments where prosecuted by the attorney-general or solicitor-general 
in the King's Bench Division. Id. If the attorney-general delay bringing 
the information to trial, the defendant cannot take it down by proviso; 
R. v. WLeod, 2 East, 202 ; but if it is not brought to trial within twelve 
calendar months next after the plea of not guilty has been pleaded, the 
defendant may, after twenty days' notice to the attorney-general or 
solicitor-general, apply to the court, which may authorize the defendant 
to bring on the trial, asd he may bring it on accordingly, unless a nolle 
prosequi be entered. 60 G. 8 & 1 G. 4, c. 4, *. 9. See also Or. Off. Rules, 
1886, rr. 44, 45, for securing the speedy trial of the defendant, and his 
being speedily brought up for judgment, when he is in custody. The 
attorney-general is entitled, if he please, to a trial at bar ; R. v. Johnson, 
1 Str. 644 : Paddock v. Forrester, 4 St. Tr., N. S. 557; 1 Man. & G. 583 : 
R. v. Pinney, 3 St. Tr. t N. S. 17, n.; and to bring on the case out 
of its turn. Short & Mellor, Or. Off. Pract. 278. As to the venue and 
procedure on a trial at bar, see Dixon v. Farrer, 18 Q. B. D. 43 ; Or. Off. 
Rides, 1886, rr. 160-163. At the trial the attorney-general has the right 
of reply, even though the defendant call no witnesses. R. v. Marsden, 
M. <fe M. 439. The cases on this subject are collected in 2 St. Tr. 9 N. S. 
1019 ; and see post, p. 212. 

Costs.'}— On the trial of an information there is no jurisdiction to give 
costs for or against the crown, nor to direct their payment out of tho 
local rate. As to the position of the crown with respect to costs, see 
ITullock, 557 : R. v. Beadle, 26 L. J. (M. C.) Ill : Thomas v. Pritrhard [19031 
1 K. B. 209 : R. v. Archbishop of Canterbury [1902] 2 K. B. 572, 



Sect. 8. 

information by the master of the crown office. 

What and in what cases.] — An information by the master of the crown 
office is a formal written suggestion of an offence committed, filed in the 
King's Bench Division of the High Court of Justice at the instance of an 
individual, with the leave of the court, by the master of the crown office, 
without the intervention of a grand jury. The right of private prosecutors 
to file informations for trespass, battery, or other misdemeanors without 



By Matter of Crown Office* 145 

the leave of the court was taken away by 4 Will. & Mar. c 18, s$. 1, 5. 
See R. v. Robinson, 1 W. Bl. 541. 

This, as does the information ex officio (see ante, p. 142), lies for mis- 
demeanor only (2 Hale, 151 ; 2 Hawk, c 26, ss. 7-12), and not for treason, 
felony, or misprision of treason. The court has power to give leave to 
file a criminal information of this description for any misdemeanor what- 
ever, but usually grants leave only in the case of gross and notorious mis- 
demeanors, riots, batteries, libels, and other immoralities of an atrocious 
kind, not specially concerning the state ; Ex parte Crawshay, 8 Cox, 856; 
nor peculiarly tending to disturb the government, for those are left to 
the care of the attorney-general (R. v. Harvey, 2 St. Tr., N. S.1;2B.& C. 
257 ; 3 D. & R. 464), but which, on account of their magnitude or per- 
nicious example, deserve the most public animadversion. 4 BL Com. 
309. In substance informations are granted only in cases which before 
the abolition of the Star Chamber went to that court as too serious for 
the ordinary courts, or because justice could not be obtained in them. 
See R. v. Sedley, 1 Sid. 168 ; 17 St. Tr. 155, n. ; Baildon, Star Chamber 
Reports. In a few cases informations have been granted for non-repair 
of roads or bridges where the grand jury has ignored a bill of indict- 
ment R. v. Upton St. Leonards, 10 Q. B. 827. The cases in which they 
have been granted fall under the following heads : — 

Blasphemy."] — Id formations have been granted for publishing a blas- 
phemous libel; R. v. Richard Carlile, 4 St. Tr., N. S. 1423 ; 3 B. & Aid. 
161 ; or an invective upon the established religion of the country. R. v. 
Waddington, 1 St. Tr., N. S. 1339: 1 B. cfe C. 26; 25 R. R. 288 : R. v. 
Curl, 2 Str. 788; 17 St. Tr. 153. 

Bribery and corruption.] — An attempt to bribe a privy councillor to 
obtain a patent of an office under government ; R. v. Vaughan, 4 Burr. 
2494 ; an attempt to bribe at an election for members to serve in parlia- 
ment ; R. v. Robinson, 1 W. Bl. 541 : R. v. Isherwood, 2 Ld. Ken. 202 : 
R. v. Pitt, 1 W. Bl. 380 ; 3 Burr. 1335 ; bribing persons, either by money 
or promises, to vote at elections of officers of corporations ; R. v. Plymp- 
ton, 2 Ld. Raym. 1377 : R. v. Mayor of Tiverton [1723] 8 Mod. 186 ; bribery 
in the election of an alderman, who, by virtue of his office, is a justice of 
the peace ; R. v. Steward, 2 B. & Ad. 12 ; attempting to bribe jurymen ; 
R. v. Young, 2 East, 14, cit. ; or clerks in public offices ; R. v. Beale, 1 East, 
183, cit. ; endeavouring to procure the appointment of certain persons to 
be overseers of the poor, with a view to derive a private advantage to the 
party. R. v. Jolliffe, 1 East, 154> n. ; 4 T. R. 285. 

Immorality.] — Where a music-master, in consideration of a sum of 
money, assigned over his female apprentice to a gentleman under pretence 
of her receiving lessons from him in music, but really for the purposes 
of prostitution, the court upon application granted a criminal information 
against the gentleman, the music-master, and the attorney who drew up 
the assignment. R. v. Ddaval, 3 Burr. 1434 ; 1 W. Bl. 410, 439 ; and see 
R. v. Sedley 9 1 Sid. 168; 17 St. Tr. 155, n. 

Libel.] — The court at one time used to grant criminal informations for 
libels reflecting on the conduct of private individuals, if attended with 
circumstances of aggravation. R. v. Benfield, 2 Burr. 980 : R. v. Miles, 
1 Doug. 284 : R. v. Haswell, Id. 387 : R. v. Staples, Andr. 228. With the 
repeal of the Acts de scandalis magnatum and change in opinion and cir- 
cumstances the rule established by modern decisions is that a criminal 

A.OJP. 10 



146 Information. 

information for libel will not be granted at the suit of private persons, 
but only on the application of persons in a public office or position ; B. v. 
Ijabouchere, 12 Q. B. D. 330 ; 53 L. J. (Q. B.) 362; for instance, for libels 
reflecting on the conduct of magistrates in the execution of their duties ; 
R. v. Waite, 1 Wils. (K. B.) 22 ; of conduct of the mayor of a city during 
his term of office ; B. v. O'Brien, Cooke & Alcock (Ir. K. B.) 128 ; of 
members of parliament in the execution of their duties in parliament ; 
B. v. Has well y 1 Doug. 387 ; of persons high in office under government in 
the execution of their several duties; of a public body; B. v. Williams, 
5 B. <fc Aid. 595 ; 1 St. Tr., N. S. 1291 ; and the like. See B. v. Jenour, 7 
Mod. 400 ; It. V. Dennison, Lofft, 148 ; It. v. Kinnersley, 1 W. Bl. 294, and n. 

Offences against the administration of justice.'] — Informations have been 
granted for prejudging a criminal case by representing in a theatrical 
exhibition a man in the act of committing the offence. R. v. Williams, 
2 L. J., 0. S. t K.B.SO; 26 B. B. 624, and cf. Monson v. Tussauds, Ltd. 
[1894], 1 Q. B. 671. And in B. v. Tibbits & Windust [1902] 1 K. B. 77 
it was held to be an indictable offence to attempt to pervert the course of 
justice by publishing articles affecting the conduct and character of per- 
sons about to be tried. The C. G. R., in coming to this decision, followed 
R. v. Williams, ubi supra, and B. v. Fisher, 2 Camp. 563. So, where a 
defendant in an information, immediately before the trial, distributed 
handbills in the assize town, vindicating his own conduct, and reflecting 
on that of the prosecutor, the court, considering the handbills to have been 
distributed by the defendant for the purpose of influencing the jury in his 
favour at the trial, granted a criminal information against him. R. v. 
Jolliffe, 4 T. R. 285 ; 2 B. B. 383. So, the court granted a criminal 
information against a person for publishing the proceedings before a 
coroner, with comments previously to the trial, although the statement 
was correct, and no malicious motive shown ; for such publications have a 
tendency improperly to influence the public mind, and particularly the 
jury by whom the cause is afterwards to be tried. R. v. Fleet, 1 B. <fe 
Aid. 379 ; 19 B. R. 132. See B. v. Wright, 8 T. B. 293; 4 B. B. 649. It 
is now found more expeditious in such case to proceed for contempt of 
court where the proceeding affected is in one of the branches of the 
High Court : B. v. Parke [1903] 2 K. B. 432 : B. v. Freeman's Journal 
T1902] 2 Ir. Bep. 82. But the existence of the summary remedy is no 
bar to proceedings by indictment or information : B. v. Tibbits, ubi supra. 
Informations have also been granted for procuring a grand jury to throw 
out bills: Anon., Bowe (Ir. K. B.) 644, 727; for attempting to suborn 
witnesses in a civil suit : B.v. Phillips, Cos. (K. B.), temp. Hardw. 241 ; 
and for attempting to induce witnesses to keep out of the way : It. v. 
Lawley, 2 Str. 904 ; and also for a conspiracy to obtain a false verdict : 
B. v. Opie, Wms. 1 Saund. 300 K. 

And an information has been granted for publishing an invective 
against judges and juries, with a view to bring into suspicion and con- 
tempt the administration of justice. B. v. White, 1 Camp. 359 ; 30 St. TV. 
1131. And where an order was made by a corporation, and entered on 
tbeir books, stating that J. S. (against whom a jury had given a verdict 
with large damages in an action for a malicious prosecution for perjury, 
which verdict bad been confirmed in the court of Common Pleas) was 
actuated by motives of public justice, etc., in preferring the indictment, 
the court, deeming the order to be a libel reflecting upon the adminis- 
tration of justice, upon application granted a criminal information against 
the parties concerned in making it. R. v. Watson, 2171 B. 199 : 1 R. R. 
461. See also B. v. Gray [1900] 2 Q. B. 36. 



By Master of Crown Office. 147 

A criminal information will not be granted for words imputing mis- 
conduct to a justice of the peace in his office, unless tending to a breach 
of the peace, or spoken to the magistrate when sitting as such. Ex parte 
Duke of Marlborough, 5 Q. B. 955 ; Ex parte Chapman, 1A.&E. 773. 

Misconduct by judicial officers."] — There are no modern precedents of 
indictments or informations against judges of a superior court of record 
for oppression or extortions under colour of office. See Anderson v. 
Oorrie [1895] 1 Q. B. 668 : Mayne, Ind. Cr. L. [1896] 342. For an early 
precedent, see Y. B. 14 & 15 Edw. 3 (ed. Pike), Preface. An information 
will lie against a judge of an inferior court of record for misconduct in 
office. A rule for a criminal information against a county court judge, 
for misconduct in his office, was discharged on the ground that the 
applicant had made the same misconduct the subject of a memorial to 
the Lord Chancellor, praying for inquiry, and so had elected his remedy. 
B. v. Marshall, 4 E. & B. 475; L. J. (Q. B.) 242 j see Anon., 4 A. & E. 
576, n. 

The court can grant a criminal information against a justice of the 
peace for any illegal act committed by him from fraudulent, corrupt or 
-vindictive motives, or for manifest illegality and oppression, or gross 
abuse of power, or partiality and wilful abuse of discretion, or wilful dis- 
obedience of the orders of a superior court. B. v. Wykes, Andr. 238; B. v. 
Soane, Id. 272 : B. v. Cozens, 2 Doug. 426 : B. v. Jones, 1 Wils. (K. B.) 7; 
cf B. v. Ne-Mton, 1 Sir. 413 : B. v. Staffordshire J J., 1 Chit. (K. B.) 217. 
The following cases illustrate the occasions on which the power has been 
exercised :— L A justice acting where he had direct interest. B. v. Davis, 
Lofft, 62 : B. v. Whateley, 4 Man. <fc By. 431 : B. v. Hoseason, 14 East, 605, 
or failing without lawful excuse to return to the assizes examinations 
taken by him. B. v. Going, Bowe (Ir. K. B.) 563. 2. Grant or refusal 
of alehouse licences, from corrupt motives or resentment B. v. Young, 
1 Burr. 556, 560, 561 : B. v. Nottingham J J., Say. 216 : B. v. Holland, 

1 T. B. 692, 1 B. B. 362 : B. v. Davis, B. v. Williams, 3 Burr. 1317 : 
B. v. Hann, 3 Burr. 1716. In Boulter v. Kent Justices [1897] App. Cos. 
556, it was held that justices sitting for the grant or renewal of liquor 
licences do not sit as a court : cf. B. v. Howard [1902] 2 K. B. 363 
C\ A. ; so that it may be doubted whether the old cases as to information 
are now of authority. But see B. v. Manchester J J. [1899] 1 Q. B. 571 : 
B. v. Nicholson [1899] 2 Q. B. 455. 3. Illegal appointment of over- 
seers from corrupt and improper motives. B. v. Somersetshire J J., 1 D. & 
B. 443 : cf B. v. JoUiffe, 1 East, 154, cit. 4. Corruptly making a false 
return to a mandamus. B. v. Lancashire J J., 1 D. & B. 485. 5. Abuse 
of authority by an obviously improper conviction ; R. v. Webster, 3 T. B. 
388 : B. v. Martin, Bowe (Ir. K. B.) 726 ; or an obviously illegal sentence ; 
B. v. Mather, 3 Barnard. 249 ; or by interfering with order of another 
justice; B. v. Brooke, 2 T. B. 190; or refusing bail from improper 
motives ; B. v. Badger, 4 Q. B. 468; 4 St. Tr., N. S. 1387; destroying a 
house on not finding the men he was searching for ; Anon., Bowe (Ir. K. B.) 
645; or abusing the prosecutor in a case before him. B. v. Manley (Id.) 
646. But to induce the court to act there must be prima facie evidence 
that the justice acted from corrupt motives (C. 0. B., 1886, r. 48), and not 
from mistake or ignorance of law or in bond fide exercise of discretion. 
B. v. Palmer, 2 Burr. 1162 : B. v. Davie, 2 Doug. 588 : B. v. Brooke, 2 
T. B. 190 : B. v. Jackson, 1 T. B. 653 ; 1 B. B. 343 : B. v. Seton, 7 T. B. 
373: B. v. Barker, 1 East, 186 : B. v. Baylis, 3 Burr. 1318 : B. v. Fielding, 

2 Id. 719 : B. v. Borron, SB.& Aid. 432 ; 1 St. Tr., N. S. 1347 ; 22 B.B. 
147 : hx parte Fcntiman, 2 A. & E. 127. If the act complained of was 



118 Information. 

done at general or quarter sessions the evidence of deliberate misconduct 
or corruption most be very strong. B. v. Seaford J J., 1 W. Bl. 482 : 
B. v. Shrewsbury J J., 2 Barnard. 272 : B. v. Phelps, 2 Ld. Kenyon, 570 : 
i?. y. Eyres, 2 Barnard, 250. 

Misconduct by ministerial officers.'] — The court will grant an information 
against ministerial officers, for any act of oppression, or for any illegal 
act committed by them in the execution of their duties, from corrupt, 
vindictive, or other improper motives; but not where they act from 
ignorance or mistake merely. B. v. Friar, 1 Chit. Bep. (K. B.) 702. 
Informations have been granted against overseers for forcing a pauper to 
marry another pauper then pregnant with a bastard ; B. v. Tarrant, 4 
Burr. 2106 ; for a conspiracy by parish officers to marry persons settled 
in different parishes ; B. v. Compton, Cold. 246 : B. v. Herbert, 2 Ld. Ktn. 
466 ; and for procuring one to marry an idiot chargeable to the parish ; 
B. v. Watson, 1 Wils. (K. B.) 41 ; but it has long been settled practice to 
refuse informations in such cases, and to leave the applicant to seek his 
remedy by indictment : see Cold. 447, n. (a) ; 2 Nolan, 262. 

The court has granted a criminal information against a person for 
refusing to take upon himself the office of sheriff, because the vacancy of 
the office occasioned'an interruption of public justice, and the year would 
be nearly expired before an indictment could be brought to trial. B. v. 
Woodrow, 2 T. B. 731. See B. v. Orosvenor, 2 Str. 1193 ; 1 Wils. {K. B.) 
18 : B. v. Shacklington, Andr. 201 n. 

Discretion of the court.]— The grant of the information is in the dis- 
cretion of the court, and is not of right nor ex debito justitiae, as the remedy 
is extraordinary and an alternative to proceedings by indictment. In 
the exercise of this discretion the court nas refused to grant a criminal 
information for an illegal act committed by a person under a bond fide 
conviction that he was merely exercising a legal right ; B. v. Parkyns, 3 
B. & Aid. 668 : 22 B. B. 519 ; and where the application was made agaicst 
a poor man residing at a distance, to whom it would be very inconvenient, 
if not impossible, to show cause against the rule, or to appear afterwards 
to receive judgment if convicted. See B. v. Compton, Cald. 246; cf. Loft, 
155. They have refused it also against the members of a corporation, for 
a misapplication of the corporation funds, it being rather a subject for an 
application to the court of Chancery. B. v. Watson, 2 T. B. 199 : 1 B. B. 
461. They have also refused to grant it where the applicant himself was 
not free from imputation ; Lofft, 314; or had already taken civil proceedings ; 
Anon. 4 A. & K. 576, n. ; or had, before applying for the rule, entered into 
a correspondence with the person sought to be made defendant. Ex. 
parte Ilaviland, 44 J. P. 789. So, where an application was made for a 
criminal information on a charge of raising great sums by subscription for 
trading purposes, as being one of those schemes denounced by 6 G. I, c. 18, 
a. 18 (rep.), the court refused to grant it, as the statute had not been acted 
upon for a great length of time, and was now sought to be enforced by a 
private relator, who seemed not to have been deluded by the project, but 
to have subscribed with a view to an application to the court. B. v. 
Dodd, 9 East, 516. See B. v. Webb, 14 East, 406. Informations have been 
granted for sending a challenge to fight a duel. B. v. Younghusband, 4 
N. <ft M. 850 : B. v. Holmes, Bowe (Ir. K. B.) 239 : B. v. Bowe, Id., 288, 418 : 
B. v. Barman, Id., 441 : B. v. Staunton, 1 Ir. Law Bee. (0. S.), 7 : B. v. 
Maunsell[183Q] 1 Ir. Law Bee, 257: Armstrong v. Kiernan,! Cox,6(Ir.). 
But an information for a challenge has been refused, when it appeared that 
the party applying had previously written letters to the other, provoking 
him to fight ; but the court said that, if both parties had applied for 



by Master of Crown Office. 149 

informations, they would have granted them. R. v. Bankey, 1 Burr. 316. 
And an information has been refused, where the application was made by 
notorious gamesters against other gamesters, for a conspiracy to cheat 
them at a race. R. v. Peach, 1 Burr. 648. Even in cases which would 
warrant an information, if the court think it will be sufficient punishment 
for the defendant to pay the costs already incurred by the prosecutor, 
they will discharge the rule nisi upon these terms, if acceded to by the 
defendant. R. v. Morgan, 1 Doug. 814 : R. v. Cozens, 2 Doug. 426. 

When and how to be moved for, etc.] — " The application for a criminal 
information shall be made to a Divisional Court (of the King's Bench 
Division) by a motion for an order nisi within a reasonable time after the 
offence complained of." Or. Off. Rules, 1886, r. 48, which adopts the 
practice as laid down in R. v. Barries, 13 East, 270 ; 12 R. R. 338 : R. v. 
Marshall, 13 East, 322 : 12 R. R. 340 : R. v. Smith, 7 T. R. 80 : R. v. 
Bishop, 5B.& Aid. 612 : 24 R. R. 494 : R. v. Saunders, 10 Q. B. 48*. The 
motion must be founded upon an affidavit disclosing all the material facts 
of the case. It is a strong, although not a conclusive, reason for rejecting 
an application for leave to file a criminal information that the applicant 
does not reside in this country. R. v. Labouchere, 12 Q. B. D. 320 ; 53 
L. J. (Q. B.) 362. If the court grant the order nisi, it is afterwards, upon 
showing cause, discharged or made absolute, as in ordinary cases. But 
the court cannot compel the prosecutor to proceed to make it absolute. 
R. v. Sherwood, 2 L. J. (0. S.) K. B. 78 : 26 R. R. 626. 

Under the Crown Office Rules, 1886, r. 47, " No application shall be 
made for a criminal information against a justice of the peace for miscon- 
duct in his magisterial capacity unless a notice containing a distinct 
statement of the grievances, or acts of misconduct complained of, be 
served personally upon him, or left at his residence, with some member of 
his household, six days before the time named in it for making the 
application." This rule perpetuates what had been the established 
practice both in England ana Ireland. R. v. Beming, 5 B. & Ad. 666 ; 
3 L. J. (M. C.) 3: R. v. Roe, Ir. Rep. 8 C. L. 624. 

" If the application be made against a justice of the peace for miscon- 
duct in his magisterial capacity, the applicant must depose on affidavit to 
his belief that the defendant was actuated by corrupt motives, and 
further, if for an unjust conviction, that the defendant is innocent of the 
charge." Id. r. 48. The rule embodies the practice as stated in R. v. 
Saunders, 2 Cox, 249. 

The motion must be made by counsel, and is not entertained if made 
by a private individual. R. v. Lancaster J J., 1 Chit. Rep. (K. B.) 602. 
Anon. 2 Ir. Law Rec. (0. S.) 479. The words "innocent of the charge" 
continue the practice as laid down in R. v. At hay, 2 Burr. 653 : R. v. 
Webster, 3 T. R. 388, as to the necessity of removing or quashing the 
conviction before a rule will be granted ; see R. v. Beber, 2 Str. 915. The 
abolition of the division of the legal year into terms so far as relates to 
the administration of justice by s. 26 of the Judicature Act, 1873 (36 & 
37 Vict. c. 66), appears to render it unnecessary to refer (for the purposes 
of rule 48) to the old division into terms in computing the time within 
which an application may be made for a criminal information against a 
magistrate for anything done in execution of his office. On the con- 
struction of that section see re College of Christ, Brecknock and Martin, 3 
Q. B. D. 16 ; 46 L. J. (Q. B.) 591. 

The motion must in all cases be made upon affidavits disclosing all the 
material facts of the case ; if a material fact be suppressed or misrepre- 
sented, the court will discharge the rule ; R. v. Wroughton, 3 Burr. 1683, 



150 Information. 

very probably with costs against the applicant: -ft- v. Wroughton (ubi 
supra) ; or perhaps, in an extreme case, against his solicitor : ft. v. Ander- 
son, [1840] 2 Ir. Law Rep. 262 : ft. v. Thomas, 7 A.&E. 608. And, as the 
court is in a manner substituted for a grand jury, it will in general 
expect that the fact so disclosed shall amount to such evidence as would 
satisfy a grand jury, if an indictment was preferred for the offence, ft. v. 
Willett, 6 T. ft. 294 : ft. v. Williamson, 3B.& Aid. 582. The affidavit must 
connect the person complained of with the offence by legal evidence. 
ft. v. Stamjer, L. ft., 6 Q. ft. 352 ; 40 L. J. (Q. B.) 96. Therefore where a 
rule nisi had been granted calling upon S. to show cause why an informa- 
tion should not be exhibited against him publishing a libel in a news- 
paper, and the affidavit simply showed that copies of the newspaper had 
Deen purchased at the publishing office of the paper, that by a foot-note 
printed at the end of the copies S. was stated to be the printer and 
publisher of them, and that the deponent believed that S. was the printer 
and publisher, the court discharged the rule on the ground that the 
affidavit was insufficient Id. The question was raised, but not decided, 
whether, under such circumstances, recourse can be had to the affidavits 
used by the defendant in showing cause, to supply the defect in those for 
the prosecution. Id. An information may be granted upon the uncon- 
tradicted affidavit of one who was particeps criminis. ft. v. Steward, 2 
B. & Ad. 12. If the subject of the application be a libel upon an individual 
charging him with a particular offence, the court always requires the 
prosecutor to deny the charge upon oath, before they will grant the informa- 
tion ; ft. v. Miles, 1 Doug. 284 : ft. v. Haswell, Id. 387. But it is otherwise 
if the charge be general or be against a public body of men; ft. v. 
Williams, bB.& Aid. 595, 1 D. & ft. 197; or if it relate to anything said, 
or supposed to have been said, by the prosecutor in parliament as a 
member : ft. v. Haswell, 1 Doug. 387. As to the practice on such applica- 
tions (before ft. v. Laboudiere, 12 Q. B. D. 320, ante, p. 146). See ft. v. Tins 
Werld, 13 Cox, 305. Where a criminal information was applied for against 
a magistrate, for improperly convicting a person, the court refused to grant 
it, unless the party complaining would make an exculpatory affidavit 
denying the charge, ft. v. Webster, 3 T. ft. 388. The affidavit upon which 
the order nisi is moved for must not be intituled in any cause, ft. v. 
Harrison, 6 T. ft. 60 : ft. v. ftobinson, Id. 642, tit. The affidavits, upon 
showing cause, are intituled The King v. the party complained of. ft. v. 
Jones, 2 Str. 704 : see King (qui tarn) v. Cole, 6 T. ft. 642. And all the 
affidavits used must now be entitled, " In the High Court of Justice, 
King's Bench Division." 

If it be intended to file a joint information against several persons, the 
application should be joint against all in the first instance : for, where 
distinct rules were obtained against five persons severally, and one 
information thereupon filed against them jointly, the court, upon 
application, set aside the proceedings, ft. v. Heydon, 3 Burr. 1270. 

Proceedings for a criminal information once instituted cannot be with- 
drawn or compromised without the sanction of the court, ft. v. Newton, 
67 /. P. ftep. 453. 

A rule for a criminal information was granted, and discharged upon an 
affidavit of the truth of the charge ; subsequently it was discovered that 
the affidavit in answer to the rule was false, and the court granted 
another rule, which was made absolute, ft. v. Eve, bA.&E. 780. 

The Law of Libel Amendment Act, 1888 (51 & 52 Vict, c 64, 8. 8, which 
forbids prosecution by indictment of libels in registered newspapers with- 
out the leave of a judge of the High Court; see ex parte Pulbrook [1892], 
1 Q. B. 86; does not prevent proceedings by way of criminal information. 



By Master of Crown Office. 151 

That Act repealed s. 3 of the Newspaper IAbel and Registration Act, 1881 
(44 <£ 45 Vict, c. 60), which also did not affect proceedings by criminal 
information. R. v. Yates, 11 Q. B. D. 750 ; 52 L. J. (Q. B.) 778 : Yates 
v. R., 14 Q. B. D. 648; 54 L. J. (Q. B.) 258. 

Form.'] — The form of an information filed by the master of the crown 
office is as follows : — 

Middlesex, to wit : — Be it remembered, that James Robert Mellor, esquire, 
coroner and attorney of our present sovereign lord the King, in the King's 
Bench Division of his Majesty's High Court of Justice, before the King him- 
self who for our said lord the King in this behalf prosecutes [proceeding as 
in the form of an information ex officio, ante, p. 143, substituting the name 
and style of the King's coroner and attorney for those of the attorney- 
general]. 

Filing, etc.] —After the court has made the rule absolute, the informa- 
tion may be filed at the crown office, upon the prosecutor's entering into 
the usual recognizances for costs. " With the exception of ex officio 
informations filed by the attorney-general on behalf of the crown no 
criminal information . . . shall be exhibited, received, or filed at the 
Crown Office Department without express order of the King's Bench 
Division in open court, nor shall any process be issued upon any infor- 
mation other than an ex officio information, until the person procuring 
such information to be exhibited shall have filed at the Crown Office 
Department a recognizance in the penalty of 50/. effectually to prosecute 
such information and to abide and observe such orders as the court shall 
direct, such recognizance to be entered into before the King's coroner and 
attorney or the master of the Crown Office, or a justice of the peace of the 
county, borough, or place in which the same may hare arisen." Or. Off. 
Rules, 1886, r. 46. See form of recognizance, App. to Cr. Off. Rules, 1886 , 
Form 27. 

Costs.] — The defendant up^n acquittal is not entitled to any costs 
beyond the extent of the recognizance. R. v. File wood, 2 T. R. 145 : see 
R. v. Brooke, 2 Id. 190. See also R. v. Savile, 18 Q. B. 703, and Cr. Off. 
Rules, 1886, r. 49, infra. In cases of informations for libel, however, a 
more extensive remedy for costs is given by the Libel Act, 1846 (6 & 7 
Vict, c 96, s. 8), which enacts, that in case of any indictment or informa- 
tion by a private prosecutor for the publication of any defamatory libel, 
if judgment shall be given for the defendant, he shall be entitled to 
recover from the prosecutor the costs sustained by the defendant by 
reason of such indictment or information; and upon a special plea of 
justification to such indictment or information, if the issue be found for 
the prosecutor, he shall be entitled to recover from the defendant the 
costs sustained by the prosecutor by reason of such plea, such costs so to 
be recovered by the defendant or prosecutor respectively to be taxed by 
the proper officer of the court before which the said indictment or infor- 
mation is tried. Under this section it has been held, that, on a criminal 
information for libel, the defendant, haying recovered judgment, was 
entitled to costs, though the only plea on the record was not guilty, and 
though the judge had certified, under 4 W. & M . c. 18, a. 2 (rep.), that 
there was reasonable cause for exhibiting the information ; R. v. Latimer, 
15 Q. B. 1077; 20 L. J. (G. B.) 129; and that where, on such an infor- 
mation, judgment is given for the defendant, he is entitled to costs 
incurred previously to the filing of the information, as well as to costs 



152 Information. 

incurred subsequently to the filing of the information. R. v. Steel, 1 Q. 
B. D. 482 ; 46 L. J. (Q. B.) 891. The provisions of s. 8 are embodied in 
Or. Off. Rules, 1886, r. 50. 

Appearance and pleading.'] — When the information is filed, process 
issues to compel the appearance of the defendant, if an appearance be 
not already entered for nim. He then either pleads to it, or applies to 
quash it ; and on issue joined, the proceedings are brought on to trial. 
See Short & Mellor, Or. Off. Practice, 272-278; Cr. Off. Rules, 1886, 
rr. 83-98! 128-133. " If the prosecutor on any information not ex officio 
does not proceed to trial within a year after issue joined, or if the prose- 
cutor causes a nolle prosequi to be entered, or if the defendant be acquitted 
(unless the judge at the time of trial certifies that there was reasonable 
cause for the information), the court, on motion for the same, may award 
the defendant his costs to the amount of the recognizance entered into 
by the prosecutor on filing the information.*' Or. Off. Rules, 1886, r. 49. 
See also rr. 44, 45, for securing the speedy trial of the defendant, and his 
being speedily brought up for judgment, when in custody. 

In what cases quashed or stayed.] — The court will very seldom quash 
an information filed by the master of the crown office ; indeed, in some of 
the books it is laid down that they will not quash it in any case. See R. 
v. Nixon, 1 Str. 185 : R. v. Fountain, 1 Sid. 152. They have, however, 
interfered in this manner in a very few cases, under peculiar circumstances. 
See R. v. Roper, 2 Str. 1072 : R. v. Williams, 1 Burr. 385. If quashed on 
the motion of the prosecutor, it must be upon payment by him of the 
defendant's costs, at least to the extent of the recognizance. (See ante, p. 
121.) Where a criminal information had been granted, and the attorney- 
general afterwards, for the same cause, filed an information ex officio, the 
court stayed the former until further order. R. v. Alexander, MS., E. 1. 
1830. It seems to have been laid down as a rule of practice of the court, 
that a person who applies for a criminal information must waive his right 
of action in that court for the same cause, unless the court should, on 
hearing the whole matter, be of opinion that it was a proper subject 
to be tried in a civil action, and should specifically give him leave to do 
so ; and it was said that, if an information was granted, it was of course 
to stay the proceedings in an action for the same cause. R. v. Sparrow, 
2 T. R. 198. And in R. v. Mahon (1836), 4A.&E. 575, the court refused 
to pass sentence in a conviction for assault by the O'Gorman Mahon 
while a civil action was pending for the assault. See Short & Mellor, Or. 
Off. Practice, 256. However, where a rule for a criminal information for 
a libel was discharged on cause shown, this was held not to preclude the 
applicant from bringing an action in another court for the publication of 
the same libel. Wakley v. Cooke, 16 M. <ft W. 822; 16 L. J. {Ex.) 225. 

New trial.] — See post, ch. viii. sect. 4. 



( 153 ) 



CHAPTEE UL 

oobonkb's inquisition. 

Cobonebs are ancient officers of the common law : so called because 
they deal principally with the pleas of The Crown, and were of old time 
the principal conservators of the peace within their county : 2 Hawk. c 9, 
*. 1; Stephen, 1 Hist. Or. L. 217 : Seld. Soc. PuU. vol. 9. 

Coroner's inquisition as a mode of criminal prosecution.] — The finding 
of a coroner's inquest is equivalent to the finding of a grand jury ; and 
a defendant may be prosecuted for murder or manslaughter upon an 
inquisition, which is the record of the finding of a jury sworn to inquire 
concerning the death of the deceased, super visum corporis. Such an 
inquisition amounts to an indictment (it. v. Ingham, 5 B.& S. 257 ; 33 
L. J. (Q. B.) 183), and by Lord Coke, and the older law-writers, is fre- 
quently designated by that name, and a defendant is arraigned upon it 
in the same way as upon an indictment, and may plead, or take exception 
to it precisely as if it had been found by a grand jury, and he may be 
tried and sentenced on such inquisition. Re Ward, 30 L. J. Ch. Tib, 776, 
per Lord Campbell. It is the practice at assizes, where a prisoner stands 
charged with murder or manslaughter, in order to guard against any 
failure of justice, also to prefer a bill of indictment for the same offence 
before the grand jury. It is usual when a bill of indictment for the 
offence charged in the inquisition has been ignored, to offer no evidence 
on the coroner's inquisition, but it is occasionally found more convenient 
to try on the inquisition, and cases have occurred when this was done 
and the defendant was convicted of manslaughter. If a true bill is found 
the defendant is arraigned on both the indictment and the inquisition at 
the same time : 1 East, P. C. 371. If the bill is ignored the defendant 
must still be arraigned on the inquisition. But where a defendant against 
whom a verdict of guilty has been found on the coroner's inquest, and 
against whom also the grand jury have found a true bill, is arraigned and 
tried upon one only and acquitted, he must afterwards be arraigned upon 
the other ; to which, however, he may effectually plead autrefois acquit. 
2 Hale, 61 ; 4 Bl. Com. 301 ; 1 Chitty, Cr. L. 163 ; R. v. Cole, 3 Camp. 371 ; 
2 Leach, 1095; R. v. Maynard, R. tfc R. 240. 

Authority and duty of coroner in holding inquests in cases of murder and 
manslaughter.'] — The duty of a coroner, in cases " where any be slain or 
suddenly dead," was pointed out with great particularity by the statute 
4 Edw. 1 (De Officio Coronatoris), which is said to have been merely 
directory, and in affirmance of the common law. (See Seld. Soc. Publ. 
vol. 9, p. ziv. et sea.) That statute was repealed by *. 45 of the Coroners 
Act, 1887 (50 dc 51 Vict. c. 71), a consolidating Act Sect. 8 of the latter 
statute provides that " where a coroner is informed that the dead body of a 
person is lying within his jurisdiction, and there is reasonable cause to 
suspect that such person has died either a violent or an unnatural death, 



154 Coroner's hujui&itwn. 

or has died a sudden death of which the cause is unknown (see re Hull, 9 
Q. B. D. 689), or that such person has died in prison (R. v. Robinson, 
19 Q. B. D. 322), or in such place or under such circumstances as to 
require an inquest in pursuance of any Act, the coroner, whether the 
cause of death arose within his jurisdiction or not, shall, as soon as 
practicable, issue his warrant for summoning not less than twelve nor 
more than twenty-three good and lawful men to appear before him at 
a specified time and place, there to inquire as jurors, touching the death 
of such person as aforesaid (sub-s. 1). 

Upon the statute 4 Edw. 1 (De Officio Coronatoris), it was held that a 
coroner was bound to take his inquest upon vieiv of the dead body, and 
that an inquest otherwise taken is void ; R. v. Ferrand, 3 B. & Aid., 260 ; 
22 R. R. 373 ; and it is still the law that the coroner and jury shall, at 
the first sitting of the inquest, view the body. 50 & 51 Vict. c. 71, s. 4, 
subs. 1 (post, p. 155). It was also held under the old statute that a 
coroner might inquire as well respecting accessories before the fact to a 
murder or manslaughter, or respecting a principal in the second degree, 
aiding and abetting a murder or manslaughter, as concerning the actual 
murderer or slayer; but that he had no power to inquire concerning 
accessories after the fact ; and the same rule appears to continue under 
50 & 51 Vict. c. 71, s. 4, sub-s. 3 of which enacts that the inquisition shall 
in cases of murder or manslaughter set forth " the persons, if any, whom 
the jury find to have been guilty of such murder or manslaughter, or of 
being accessories before the fact to such murder." It was held before the 
passing of the Coroners Act, 1887, that if the dead body, whereon an 
inquest ought to be held, be interred, or suffered to putrefy before the 
coroner viewed it, the township, or, if the death occurred in a prison, the 
gaoler should be amerced; and that it was a misdemeanor to burn or 
otherwise dispose of a dead body, upon which an inquest ought to be held, 
with intent to prevent the coroner from holding the inquest R. v. Price, 
12 Q. B. D. 247 ; 53 L. J. (M. C.) 51 : R. v. Stephenson, 13 Q. B. D. 331 ; 
53 L. J. (M. C.) 176 ; Cremation Act, 1902 (2 Edw. 7 c. 8), s. 10 ; or in any 
other way to obstruct the coroner or his jury in the view or inquiry — 
Jervis on Coroners (6th ed.), 6, 86 — and the ratio decidendi of these cases 
will apply to similar cases arising since the passing of the Act. The 
coroner himself may be indicted for misdemeanor if guilty of corruption 
or wilful neglect of duty or of misbehaviour in abstaining from holding 
an inquest where it is his duty to do so. See 50 cfe 51 Vict. c. 71, s. 8, 
sub-s. 2. On the other hand, the holding of inquests unnecessarily was 
most strongly censured by Lord Ellenborough, O.J., in R. v. Justices of 
Kent, 11 East, 229 : 10 R. R. 484. The coroner has not an absolute right 
to hold inquests in every case in which he chooses to do so. It would be 
intolerable if he had power to intrude without adequate cause upon the 
privacy of a family in distress, and to interfere with their arrangements 
for a funeral. Nothing can justify such interference except a reasonable 
suspicion that there may have been something peculiar in the death, — 
that it may have been due to other causes than common illness. In such 
cases the coroner not only may, but ought to hold an inquest. R. v. Price, 
12 Q. B. D. 247, 248, Stephen, J. And a coroner is justified in holding an 
inquest if he honestly believes information which has been given to him 
to be true, which, if true, would make it his duty to hold such inquest 
R. v. Stephenson, 13 Q. B. D. 331. A coroner, also, it has been resolved, 
may lawfully, within a reasonable time after the death, order a dead body 
to be disinterred in order to view it, not only for the purpose of taking 
an inquest where none has been held before, but of taking a good inquest 
where an insufficient one has been taken before. Jervis on Coroners 



Proceedings at Inquest. 155 

(6th ed.), 27. For, where the first inquest was not held supra visum 
corporis, or is afterwards quashed by the High Court (K. B. D.), the 
coroner may hold another. 2 Hawk. c. 9, a. 23 ; 2 Hale, 58 ; Anon. 1 Str. 
533. But where an inquest has been held supra visum corporis, and a 
verdict recorded, the coroner cannot, inero motu, hold a second inquest. 
2 Hale, 59; B. v. White, 3K& E. 137; 29 L. J. (Q. B.) 257. Where a 
coroner rejected evidence which he ought to have admitted and the jury 
returned an open verdict, the inquisition was quashed by the Q. B. D., 
and a melius inquirendum awarded before the same coroner and another 
jury. B. v. Carter, 13 Cox, 220. And now a. 6 of the Coroners Act, 1887 
(50 <fe 51 Vict. c. 71), " where his Majesty's High Court of Justice, upon 
application made oy or under the authority of the attorney-general, is 
satisfied either (a) that a coroner refuses or neglects to hold an inquest 
which ought to be held; or (b) where an inquest has been held by a 
coroner that by reason of fraud, rejection of evidence, irregularity of 
proceedings, insufficiency of inquiry, or otherwise, it is necessary or 
desirable, in the interests of justice, that another inquest should be held, 
the court may order an inquest to be held touching the said death . . . 
and where an inquest has been already held may quash the inquisition 
on that inquest." That section also makes provisions as to the costs of 
the application, the coroner before whom the inquest provided for by it 
is to be held, and the proceedings at such inquest. See Jervis on Coroners 
(6th ed.), 54. Having regard to the terms of this section, it seems doubtful 
whether if a coroner neglects to take an inquisition, it can now be taken 
by the justices of goal delivery, of oyer and terminer, or of the peace, as 
stated in Bac. Abr. Coroner; 2 Hawk. c. 9, a. 23 (5) et seq. 

In view of the powers given to the secretary of state to license exhuma- 
tion (20 & 21 Vict. c. 81, s. 25), and the terms of s. 6 of the Coroners Act, 
1887, it has been doubted whether a coroner has now the power, propria 
motu, to order exhumation. See Baker on Burials (8th ed.), 43. The form 
of order in Jervis on Coroners (6th ed.), 247, is not a statutory form. 

Proceedings at the inquest.] — " When not less than twelve jurors are 
assembled they shall be sworn by or before the coroner diligently to 
inquire touching the death of the person on whose body the inquest is 
about to be held, and a true verdict to give according to the evidence." 
50 & 51 Vict. c. 71, a. 3, sub-s. 3. Though the jury cannot consist of less 
than twelve persons, it may consist of any greater number not exceeding 
twenty-three. 50 <fe 51 Vict. c. 71, a. 3, sub-s. 1 (ante, p. 154). " The 
coroner and jury shall, at the first sitting of the inquest, view the body, 
and the coroner shall examine on oath touching the death all persons who 
tender their evidence respecting the facts, and all persons having know- 
ledge of the facte whom he thinks it expedient to examine." 50 <fe 51 
Vict, c 71, a. 4, sub-s. 1. Without view the inquisition is void. B. v. 
Ferrand (ante, p. 154). The coroner has power to require and compel 
the attendance of such witnesses as he deems necessary for the investiga- 
tion of the truth of each case, and may fine them for non-attendance or for 
refusing to answer questions. 50 & 51 Vict. c. 71, a. 19, sub-s. 2. The 
Act of 1887, a. 4, sub-s. 1 (ubi supra) requires that the evidence at the 
inquest shall be given upon oath. This leaves the law as it stood before 
18o7. Wakley v. Cooke, 4 Ex. 511 ; 19 L. J. {Ex.) 91 : Jervis on Coroners 
(6th ed.). But the fact that evidence not upon oath was received by the 
coroner is no ground for a certiorari to bring up the inquisition. B. v. 
Ingham, 5 B.& S. 257 : 9 Cox, 508. It might, however, furnish ground 
for an application to the High Court of Justice for an order for another 
inquest under 50 <fc 51 Vict, c 71, a. 6, supra. " Where it appears to the 



156 Coroner* s Inquisition. 

coroner that the deceased was attended at his death or daring his last 
illness by any legally qualified medical practitioner, the coroner may 
summon such practitioner as a witness ; but if it appears to the coroner 
that the deceased person was not attended at his death or during his last 
illness by any legally qualified medical practitioner, the coroner may 
summon any legally qualified medical practitioner who is at the time in 
actual practice in or near the place where the death happened, and any 
such medical witness as is summoned in pursuance of this section, may 
be asked to give evidence as to how, in his opinion, the deceased came to 
his death." 50 <fc 51 Vict. c. 71, a. 21, subs. 1. " The coroner may, either 
in his summons for the attendance of such medical witness or at any time 
between the issuing of that summons and the end of the inquest, direct 
such medical witness to make a post-mortem examination of the body of 
the deceased, with or without an analysis of the contents of the stomach 
or intestines. Provided that where a person states upon oath before the 
coroner, that in his belief the death of the deceased was caused partly or 
entirely by the improper or negligent treatment of a medical practitioner 
or other person, such medical practitioner or other person shall not be 
allowed to perform or assist at the post-mortem examination of the de- 
ceased." Id. subs. 2. " If a majority of the jury sitting at an inquest 
are of opinion that the cause of death has not been satisfactorily explained 
by the evidence of the medical practitioner or other witnesses brought 
before them, they may require the coroner in writing to summon as a 
witness some other legally qualified medical practitioner named by them, 
and further to direct a post-mortem examination of the deceased, with or 
without an analysis of the contents of the stomach or intestines, to be 
made by such last mentioned practitioner, and that whether such ex- 
amination has been previously made or not, and the coroner shall comply 
with such requisition, and in default shall be guilty of a misdemeanor." 
Id. subs. 3. 

" It shall be the duty of the coroner in a case of murder or manslaughter 
to put into writing the statement on oath of those who know the facts and 
circumstances of the case, or so much of such statement as is material, 
and any such deposition shall be signed by the witness and also by the 
coroner." 50 A 51 Vict. c. 71, *. 4, subs. 2. [As to the admissibility in 
evidence of depositions taken before coroners, see post, Part II.] 

As to summing up by the coroner, see Jervis on Coroners (6th ed.), 40. 

"After viewing the body and hearing the evidence the jury shall give 
their verdict, and certify it by an inquisition in writing, setting forth, so 
far as such particulars have been proved to them, who the deceased was, 
and how, when, and where the deceased came by his death, and, if he came 
by his death by murder or manslaughter, the persons, if any, whom the 
jury find to have been guilty of such murder or manslaughter, or of being 
accessories before the fact to such murder." 50 A 51 Vict. c. 71, s. 4, 
sub-s. 3. If twelve at least of the jury do not agree on a verdict, the 
coroner may adjourn the inquest to the next assizes for the county or 
place for which the inquest is held, and if after hearing the charge of the 
judge or commissioner of assize twelve of the jury fail to agree on a ver- 
dict they may be discharged without a verdict. 60 & 51 Vict, c 71, s. 4, 
sub-s. 5 : Jervis on Coroners (6th ed.), 44. 

Requisites and form of inquisition in cases of murder and manslaughter.] 
— The form of an inquisition is contained in the second schedule of 60 <fc 
61 Vict. c. 71, and by sect. 37 of that Act : — " the schedules to this Act 
shall be construed and have effect as part of this Act, and the forms given 
in any of those schedules, or such other forms as the Lord Chancellor 



Form: Venue, etc 157 

from time to time directs may be need in all matters to which they apply, 
and when so used shall be sufficient in law." " The inquisition shall be 
under the hands, and in the case of murder or manslaughter also under the 
seals, of the jurors who concur in the verdict, and of the coroner." 50 <fe 51 
Vict, c 71, s. 18, 51*6-4. 1. " An inquisition need net, except in the case of 
murder or manslaughter, be on parchment, and may be written or printed, 
or partly written and partly printed, and may be in the form contained 
in the second schedule to this Act, or to the like effect or in such other 
form as the Lord Chancellor from time to time prescribes, or to the like 
effect, and the statements therein may be made in concise and ordinary 
language." Id. sub-s. 2. An inquisition consists of three parts, the cap- 
tion or incipitur, the verdict of the jury, and the attestation. It may be 
stated generally, that the same degree of certainty that is requisite in an 
indictment is requisite in a coroner's inquisition, and all the rules relating 
to the description of the offence in the case of the former so far as the 
same are applicable, govern inquisitions. [See ante, p. 35, et seq.] 

VenueJ] — The venue must be inserted in the margin, or in the body of 
the caption ; 2 Hole, 163, 166 ; but it is usually insetted in both. The 
venue should be in the county or jurisdiction within which the inquisition 
is holden. Where the inquisition is taken by the coroner of the Ad- 
miralty {see Jervis on Coroners (6th ed.), 102), no county is inserted in the 
margin as venue, but instead of it, the words, " Admiralty of England." 
To avoid difficulty in cases where the cause of death arose within one 
county or jurisdiction, and the body was lying dead within another county 
or jurisdiction, the Act of 1887 provides that "the coroner only within 
whose jurisdiction the body of a person upon whose death an inquest 
ought to be holden is lying shall hold the inquest, and where a body is 
found dead in the sea, or any creek, river, or navigable canal within the 
flowing of the sea where there is no deputy coroner for the jurisdiction of 
the Admiralty of England, the inquest shall be held only by the coroner 
having jurisdiction in the place where the body is first brought to land ; " 
j. 7, sub-s. 1 ; and " for the purpose of holding coroners' inquests, every 
detached part of a county shall be deemed to be within the county by 
which it is wholly surrounded, or, where it is partly surrounded by two 
or more counties within the county with which it has the longest common 
boundary." Sect. 40, sub-s. 1. No inquisition is rendered insufficient by 
want of a proper or perfect vonue. 14 & 15 Vict. c. 100, ss. 24, 30 {ante, 
pp. 54, 65). It must appear on the face of the inquisition at what place 
the inquest was held ; but it is not necessary that the inquest should be 
held at the place where the body lies ; and it has been decided that an 
inquest may be well held at D. upon view of a body lying dead at L. 2 
Hawk, a 9, s. 25. The inquisition ought to specify the day upon which 
the inquest was held ; if held upon a Sunday, it is said that it would be 
void. 2 Saund. 291 : Jervis on Coroners (6th ed.), 10. 

Verdict.}- By 14 <fc 15 Vict, c 100, ss. 24, 80 (ante, pp. 54, 55), no inquisi- 
tion can be held insufficient for omitting to state the time at which the 
offence was committed (where time is not of the essence of the offence), or 
for slating the time imperfectly, or for stating the offence to have been com- 
mitted subsequently to the finding of the inquisition, or on an impossible 
day, or on a day that never happened. The inquisition must show of 
what place the party who took it was coromr, and that he had competent 
jurisdiction. 2 Ld. JRavm. 1305. It is essential that the inquest shall be 
taken upon view of the body (2 Hawk. c. 9, s. 23), for the coroner can take 
an inquisition super visum corporis only (excepting where the inquest is 



158 Coroner's Inquisition. 

ordered by the High Court of Justice, v. ante, p. 155) ; the view being 
absolutely necessary to give jurisdiction to him. If the body of the 
deceased be identified, and his christian name and surname be known, 
or the name by which he was usually known be ascertained, they ought 
to be correctly stated ; but if the name of the deceased be unknown, he 
may be described as a certain person whose name is to the jurors unknown. 
It is essential to every inquisition that it be found by twelve jurors at 
the least ; 2 Hale, 161, n. ; 50 & 51 Vict. c. 71, s. 4, subs. 5 ; that the in- 
quisition is presented upon their oaths; but if any juror has made an 
affirmation instead of an oath, it is not necessary to state the fact. It 
must also appear that the jury are lawful persons from the county or 
jurisdiction within which the inquest is held. 2 Hawk. c. 9, *. 22. 

Attestation.'] — Their names ought to be inserted in the body of the 
inquisition, and the inquisition ought to be subscribed by them with 
their names. JR. v. Evett, 6B.& C. 247 : 80 E. R. 819. It was held in 
the last-mentioned case that the jurors ought to subscribe their names 
in full. 50 & 51 Vict. c. 71, s. 18, subs. 1 {ante, p. 157), merely directs that 
the inquisition shall be under their hands, and in the case of murder or 
manslaughter also under their seals. See 2 Co. Inst. 888. 

By 24 & 25 Vict. c. 100, s. 6, it is enacted that, " in any indictment " 
[which word comprehends inquisitions taken before coroners, J?, v. Ingham, 
5 B. & S. 257; 33 L. J. (Q. B.) 183] u for murder or manslaughter, or for 
being an accessory to any murder or manslaughter, it shall not be neces- 
sary to set forth the manner in which, or the means by which, the death 
of the deceased was caused, but that it shall be sufficient in any indict- 
ment for murder to oharge that the defendant did feloniously, wilfully, 
and of his malice aforethought, kill and murder the deceased; and it 
shall be sufficient in any indictment for manslaughter to charge that the 
defendant did feloniously kill and slay the deceased; and it shall be 
sufficient in any indictment against any accessory to any murder or man- 
slaughter to charge the principal with the murder or manslaughter (as 
the case may be) in the manner hereinbefore specified, and then to charge 
the defendant as an accessory in the manner heretofore used and accus- 
tomed." This gets rid of the strictness of the old rules as to pleading 
murder or manslaughter : but the form of inquisition for murder or man- 
slaughter given in the schedule to 50 & 51 Vict. c. 71, does set out the 
oircumstances of the death. If particulars are set out professing to show 
the facts justifying the verdict, the inquisition can be quashed if they are 
insufficient in law to constitute the offence found. M. v. Clerk of Assize of 
Oxford Circuit [1897] 1 Q. B. 370 : 18 Cox, 518. On the trial of an inquisi- 
tion, the court has the same powers of amendment as in the case of the 
trial of an indictment. See 14 & 15 Vict. c. 100, ss. 1, 24, and 30 (ante, pp. 
52, 54, 55). And by s. 20 of 60 <fc 51 Vi?t. c. 71,—" If in the opinion of the 
court having cognizance of the case an inquisition finds sufficiently the 
matters required to be found thereby, and where it charges a person with 
murder or manslaughter sufficiently designates that person and the offence 
charged, the inquisition shall not be quashed for any defects, and the court 
may order the proper officer of the court to amend any defect in the inquisi- 
tion, and any variance occurring between the inquisition and the evidence 
offered in proof thereof, if the court are of opinion that such defect or 
variance is not material to the merits of the case, and that the defendant 
or person traversing the inquisition cannot be prejudiced by the amend- 
ment in his defence or traverse on the merits, and the court may order 
the amendment on such terms as to postponing the trial to be had 
before the same or another jury as to the court may seem reasonable, 



Form: Process on, etc. 169 

and alter the amendment the trial shall proceed in like manner, and the 
inquisition, -verdict, and judgment, shall be of the same effect, and the 
record shall be drawn up in the same form, in all respects, as if the in- 
quisition had originally been in the form in which it stands when so 
amended." The jurisdiction to amend belongs only to the court of trial, 
B. v. Directors of G. W. B. t 20 Q. B. D. 410 ; 16 Cox, 410. If the inquisition 
is defective it may be brought up with the depositions by certiorari to 
the King's Bench Division of the High Court ana quashed ; B. v. Clerk of 
Assize of Oxford Circuit [1897] Q. B. 370 : 18 Cox, 518 : and cf. Six-mile 
Bridge Case, 6 Cox, 122 (Ir.). Where the defects are on the face of the 
inquisition the application is usually made to the court to which it is 
returned, and before plea pleaded. See Jervis on Coroners (6th ed.), 54, 55. 
The inquisition in the case of murder or manslaughter must be not 
only under the hands, but also under the seals, of the jurors and of the 
coroner; 50 <fr 51 Vict. c. 71, s. 18, sub-s. 1 (ante, p. 157); and on parch- 
ment ; Id. sub-s. 2 (ante, p. 157). On a similar provision contained in 
6 <fe 7 Vict. c. 83 (rep.), it was held that an inquisition for murder or man- 
slaughter or felo de se which was on paper instead of parchment should 
be quashed. B. v. WhaUey, 7 Bowl. & L. 317 ; 19 L. J. (Q. B.) 14. Where 
the inquisition is taken before a deputy coroner, the proper mode of sign- 
ing the attestation is " R. D. (l.s.), coroner, by £. M. his deputy duly 
appointed, 91 etc. B. v. Perkins, 7 Q. B. 165 ; 14 L. J. (M. C.) 87. As to 
the jurisdiction of deputy coroners, and the mode of proving it, see 55 cfc 
56 Vict, c 56, s. 1. When the inquest takes place in a county other than 
that in which the offence is charged by the inquisition, the inquisition 
should be returned to the court of assize for the county in which the 
offence is charged. B. v. Wight, 59 J. P. 746. 

Process upon a coroner's inquisition.'] — "Where a coroner's inquisition 

charges a person with the offence of murder or manslaughter, or of being 

accessory before the fact to a murder (which latter offence is in this Act 

included in the expression * murder '), the coroner shall issue his warrant 

for arresting or detaining such person (if such warrant has not previously 

been issued) and shall bind by recognizance all such persons examined 

before him as know or declare anything material touching the said offence, 

to appear at the next court of oyer ana terminer or gaol delivery at which 

the trial is to be, then and there to prosecute or give evidence against the 

person so charged." 50 & 51 Vict. c. 71, s. 5, subs. 1. For form of 

recognizances to prosecute and give evidence, Id. Sched. 2. " The coroner 

shall deliver the inquisition, depositions, and recognizances, with a 

certificate under his hand that the same have been taken before him, to 

the proper officer of the court in which the trial is to be, before or at the 

opening of the court." Id. s. 5, sub-s. 3. By Home Office circular of May, 

1891, coroners are requested to see that the depositions are legibly written 

and accompanied by all exhibits. If the coroner does not take them 

properly, and leturn them to the proper court or person, he is liable to 

fine under 50 & 51 Vict. c. 71, s. 9. When an inquisition is returned to 

the justices of oyer and terminer, or of gaol delivery, if the person against 

whom the coroner's jury have found their verdict of guilty has been taken, 

he is tried before them ; but if he cannot be taken, the inquisition is to be 

certified by them into the King's Bench Division, and process may then 

be awarded as upon an indictment. See ante, p. 103; 2 Hale, 64 ; 1 Chitty, 

Cr. L. 163; and for all the forms of proceeding upon inquests, see 

Jervis on Coroners (6th ed.), and Sched. 2 of 50 & 51 Vict, c 71. 

Person charged with murder or manslaughter entitled to copy of inquisition 



I 



160 Coroner's Inquisition. 

and of depositions.]—" A person charged by an inquisition with murder or 
manslaughter shall be entitled to have from the person haying for the time 
being the custody of the inquisition or of the depositions of the witnesses 
at the inquest, copies thereof on payment of a reasonable sum for the 
same, not exceeding the rate of three half-pence for every folio of ninety 
words." 50 <fc 51 Vict, c 71, a. 18, subs. 6. 

Where a prosecution for murder or manslaughter is undertaken by 
the Director of Public Prosecutions, the coroner must send the inquisition 
and depositions to that officer. 42 & 43 Vict, c 21, s. 5. By the Regula- 
tions of Jan. 25, 1886, under the Pivsecution of Offences Ads, 1879 <ft 1884 
see Douglas, Summ. Jur. Proc. (8th ed.) 485 : Stat. Rules & Orders Revised 
ed. 1904), vol. 4, tit. " Criminal Procedure, England" p. 7), it is the duty 
of the Director of Public Prosecutions to take up charges of murder, 
and it has been the practice, since the issue of a Home Office circular of 
September, 1884, for the coroner to send to that officer copies of deposi- 
tions taken on inquisitions of murder or manslaughter. See Jervis on 
Coroners (6th ed.), 52. 

Bail where the coroner has committed a party to prison."] — The provisions 
as to bail contained in the Indictable Offences -4c*, 1848 (11 <fc 12 Vict. c. 42), 
the Summary Jurisdiction Act, 1848 (11 & 12 Vict, c 43), and the Bail Act, 
1898 (61 & 62 Vict. c. 7), ante, p. 112, et seq. t do not apply to cases of com- 
mitment upon an inquisition by the warrant of a coroner ; but by 50 <Sc 51 
Vict, c 71, 8. 5, sub- s. 2, " Where the offence is manslaughter, the coroner 
may, if he thinks fit, accept bail by recognizance with sufficient sureties 
for the appearance of the person charged at the next court of oyer and 
terminer, or gaol delivery at which the trial is to be, and thereupon such 
person if in the custody of an officer of the coroner's court or under a 
warrant of commitment issued by such coroner, shall be discharged 
therefrom." As to the form of such recognizances, and the notices to be 
given to the persons bound thereby, see Id. s. 18, subs. 4, and Sched. 2. 
Where the jury find a verdict of murder, or where the coroner refuses 
bail, the High Court (E. B. D.) can grant bail. The procedure is the 
same as in other cases of bail. It is now usual to proceed by summons 
for bail, and not by writ of habeas corpus and certiorari. See ante, p. 116. 



( 161 ) 



CHAPTER IV. 

PLEAS, REPLICATIONS, ETC. 

Sect. 1. Order and Time of Pleading, p. 161. 

2. Plea to the Jurisdiction, p. 162. 

3. Plea in Abatement, p. 16o. 

4. Demurrer, p. 164. 

5. Special Pleas in Bar, p. 168. 

1. Autrefois acquit, p. 169. 

2. Autrefois convict, p. ] 74. 

3. Autrefois attaint, p. 177. 

4. Pardon, p. 178. 

6. General Issue, p. 179. 



Sect. 1. 
order and tike of pleading. 

Criminal proceedings have been specially excepted from statutes 
changing the system of pleading (e.g., 4 & 5 Anne, c. 8 ; 4 Anne, c. 16, 
Rujfhead), and are still to a great extent subject to the common law rules 
of pleading; 1 Chit. Or. L. 434. At common law no more than one plea can 
be pleaded to any indictment or criminal information for misdemeanor. 
R. v. Charlesworth, 1 B. <fc S. 460 ; 81 L. J. (M. G.) 26 : R. v. Strahan, 
7 Cox, 85. In felonies if the defendant plead in abatement, he must 
afterwards, if the plea be adjudged against him, plead oyer to the felony ; 
if he plead specially in bar, he may (R. v. Charlesworth, ubi supra), 
and should in strictness, at the same time, plead oyer to the felony. See 
post, p. 174 ; and R. v. Drury, 3 C & K. 196, 200 ; 18 L. J. (M. C) 189. 

When brought to the bar and arraigned (see post, p. 181), the prisoner 
either confesses the charge, stands mute (see post, p. 183), or aces not 
answer directly to the charge, (see 7 & 8 G. 4* c. 28, s. 2) ; or pleads to the 
jurisdiction, or in abatement— or demurs — or pleads specially in bar — 
or pleads the general issue, i.e., that he is " not guilty." Except under 
the express provisions of a statute, it is not permissible to plead double 
or to join any other plea with the general issue. R. v. Strahan, 7 Cox, 85. 
When the defendant has any special matter to plead in abatement or in 
bar, or if the indictment be demurrable, he should plead, or demur at the 
time of arraignment, before the plea of not guilty. See R. v. Binkes, 
2 Smith (K. B.) 620. 

Where a defendant prosecuted in the King's Bench Division of the 
High Court in England or Ireland, by information or indictment, for any 
misdemeanor there found or removed into that court, appears in court 
in term time in person to answer the indictment or information, he 
cannot " imparle * to a following term, but must plead or demur thereto 
within four days from the time of his appearauce; and in default of 

A.C.P. 11 



1C>2 Plea to the Jurisdiction, 

his pleading or demurring within four days, judgment may be entered 
against him for want of a plea. If he appear to the indictment by 
attorney, he cannot imparle to the following term, but may forthwith 
be ruled to plead ; and a plea or demurrer may be enforced, or judgment 
by default entered thereupon, in the same manner as before the passing 
of the Act might have been done, had the defendant appeared by his 
attorney in the preceding term. 60 G. 8 A 1 G. 4, c 4, s. 1. But the 
court or a judge may, on sufficient cause, allow further time to plead 
or demur. 60 G. 3 A 1 G. 4, c. 4, *. 2. These provisions do not apply 
to prosecutions for non-repair of a bridge or highway. 60 G. 3 A 1 G. 4. 
c. % 8. 10. 



Skot. 2. 

pl1a to the jubibd1cti0n. 

When available.]— Where an indictment is taken before a court which 
has no cognizance of the offence, the defendant may plead to the 
jurisdiction, without answering at all to the crime alleged ; 2 Bale, 268 ; 

1 Chit. Cr. L. 437 ; as if a man were indicted for treason at the quarter 
sessions, or for a rape at the sheriff's tonrn, or the like; Id.; or if 
another court have exclusive jurisdiction of the offence. 4 Bl. Cam. 333. 

But it is seldom necessary to have recourse to this plea. For it is bad 
unless it shows a court or jurisdiction in which the defendant could 
lawfully be tried. If the offence were committed out of the jurisdiction 
of the English courts, the defendant may take advantage of this matter 
under the general issue; B. v. Johnson, 6 East, 583; 8 B. B. 550; or if 
the defect of jurisdiction appears upon the face of the record, he may 
demur, or (it would seem) move in arrest of judgment, or bring a writ 
of error. See B. v. Hewitt, B. A B. 158. If, on the other hand, the 
offence were committed within the local jurisdiction of the court, but 
the court has not cognizance of it (which can occur only in the case of 
indictments in inferior courts, such as a court of quarter sessions), the 
defendant may have advantage of it upon general demurrer; B. v. 
Fcaniley, 1 T. B. 316 ; 1 Leach, 425 ; or the High Court, upon the 
indictment being removed by certiorari, will quash it. B. v. Bainton, 

2 Str. 1088. And the court before which the indictment is preferred 
will, in general, give the defendant advantage of the objection at the 
trial, under the general issue. In B. v. Balfour, Q. B. D. t Oct. \bth, 
1895, Bruce, J., it was proposed to put in a plea to the jurisdiction on 
the ground that the indictment contained counts for offences in respect 
of which the defendant had not been extradited from the Argentine 
Republic ; but the doubtful counts were withdrawn, and the plea was 
not in fact pleaded. In B. v. Jameson [1896] 2 Q. B. 425; 65 L. J. 
(31. C.) 218 ; objections on the ground of want of jurisdiction were taken 
(1) on motion to quash the indictment; and (2) when this failed, under 
the plea of not guilty. 

Form.]— The form of a plea to the jurisdiction is as follows:— 

" And tlie said J. S. in his own proper person cometh into court here, and 
having heard the said indictment read, saith, that the court of our lord the 
King here ought not to take cognizance of the [trespass and assault] in the 
•»M indictment above specified ; because protesting that he is not guilty of 
une, nevertheless the said J. S. saith, that," [etc., so proceeding to state 



said 
the same 



Plea in Abatement. 163 

the matter of the plea. See the precedents, 1 Went. 10, 18 ; 4 Went. 63. 
Conclude thus] : " And this he the said J. S. is ready to verify ; where/ore 
he prays judgment if the said court of our lord the King now here will or 
ought to take cognizance of the indictment aforesaid ; and that by the court 
here he may be dismissed and discharged, 11 etc. Then odd prof ert of any 
lettera patent which may have been set forth in the plea. The form is the 
same in the King's Bench Division, excepting that the court is described 
as * The King's Bench Division of His Majesty's High Court of Justice 
before the King himself here 19 and in the case of informations, the words, 
" having heard the said indictment readp are omitted. The plea must be 
verified by affidavit 

The form of the replication to this plea is : — And hereupon J. E. A. [the 
clerk of the court], who prosecutes for our said lord the King in this behalf 
says, that notwithstanding anything by the said J. 8. above in pleading alleged, 
this court ought not to be precluded from taking cognizance of the indictment 
aforesaid ; because he says that, n [etc., stating the matter of the replica- 
tion J. " And this the said J. tL prays may be inquired of by the country,'* etc. 
Or, if it concludes with a verification, then thus : — " And this he the said 
TL K. A. is ready to verify ; wherefore he prays judgment, and that the said 
J. S. may answer to the said indictment." Where the plea is pleaded in the 
King's Bench Division, the replication is in the name of the master of the 
crown office, in the case of an indictment or of an information filed by 
him ; or in the name of the attorney-general, in the case of informations 
ex officio. See post, p. 168. 

It a plea to the jurisdiction is quashed on demurrer or otherwise fails 
the defendant may be ordered to plead over instanter. B. v. Johnson, 
ubi supra. 



Sect. 3. 
plea in abatement. 



A plea in abatement must be pleaded before pleading the general issue. 
Without confessing or denying the fact charged, it sets up some fact which 
if proved defeats the indictment. It is, therefore, purely dilatory, must 
be pleaded exactly (O'Conndl v. B., 5 St. Tr., N. S. 1, 787), and cannot be 
amended. B. v. Cooke, 2B.&C. 871. 

It had by 1826 fallen into disuse in England except as to misnomer or 
want of proper addition (1 H. 5, c. 5) (see ante, p. 56). The Criminal Law 
Act, 1826 (7 G. 4, c. 64), s. 19, has rendered pleas in abatement useless by 
enacting that " no indictment or information shall be abated by reason of 
any dilatory plea of misnomer or of want of addition, or of wrong addition 
of the party offering such plea, if the court shall be satisfied, by affidavit 
or otherwise, of the truth of such plea ; but in such case the court shall 
forthwith cause the indictment or information to be amended according 
to the truth, and call upon the party to plead thereto, and proceed as if 
no such dilatory plea had been pleaded." And they are virtually 
abolished by 14 <fe 15 Vict, c 100, s. 24, which enacts that no indictment 
shall be held insufficient " for want of or imperfection in the addition of 
any defendant" See ante, p. 54. For form of plea in abatement see B. 
v. Shakespeare, 10 East, 83 : B. v. Sheares, 27 St. Tr. 267 ; B. v. Duffy, 7 St. 
Tr., N. S. 795, 806. 

In B. v. Swan, Fost. 105, a plea in abatement and demurrer thereto 
were allowed to be pleaded ore tenus. 

In Ireland it has been used as a mode of objecting to the qualification 



164 Demurrer. 

of grand jurors. R. v. Sheares, 27 St. Tr. 255, 267 : R. v. Sheridan, 31 
St. Tr. 543, 576 ; R. v. Duffy, 7 St. Tr., N. S. 795, 805. See vost, p. 201. 

It is not settled whether the statutes cited ante, p. Ib3, affect the 
right of a peer, when indicted as a commoner, to plead in abatement of 
an indictment for treason, misprision of treason, or felony. His title is 
not only part of his name, bat gives him a different mode of trial, viz., 
by his peer?, which apparently cannot be waived. See Lord Graves 9 case, 
4 St. Tr., N. S. 609, n. : 310 Hansard, 246, and post, p. 182. 

The judgment against the King on a plea in abatement at common law 
was that the indictment be quashed, ana was no bar to a fresh indictment 
properly framed. Under 7 G. 4. c. 64, s. 19, the indictment may be 
amended, and the defendant called to plead thereto, as if no such dilatory 
plea had been pleaded. The judgment for the King upon a plea of 
abatement, in misdemeanors, is final; in treason and felony, that the 
defendant do answer over. R. v. Gibson, 8 East, 107. 



Sect. 4. 

demurrer. 

By a demurrer to an indictment or information the defendant refers it 
to the court to pronounce whether, admitting the matters of fact alleged 
against him to be true, they do, in point of law, constitute him guilty of 
an offence sufficiently charged against him. 1 Starkie, Or. PL 315 (2nd 
ed.). Demurrers are of two kinds : 1. Special, usually called domurrers 
in abatement, bated on some formal defect in the indictment. 2. General, 
founded on some substantial defect in the indictment or last preceding 
pleading. And if the party plead to the indictment, or reply to a plea in 
bar, it will then be too late to demur unless the court consents to with- 
drawal of the plea or replication. 

Special demurrers.] — Special demurrers seem altogether obsolete. Many 
omissions in an indictment, which formerly rendered it the subject of 
special demurrer, have become altogether immaterial since the passing of 
14 & 15 Vict. c. 100, s. 24, which enacts that " no indictment," " informa- 
tion," "inquisition," "presentment," "plea," "replication," or other 
pleading, or any nisi prius record (14 & 15 Vict, c 100, s. 30), "for 
any offence shall be held insufficient for want of the averment of any 
matter unnecessary to be proved, nor for the omission of the words ' as 
appears by the record,' or of the words ' with force and arms,' or of the 
words ' against the peace/ nor for the insertion of the words * against the 
form of the statute,' instead of ' against the forms of the statutes,' or vice 
versa, nor for that any person mentioned in the indictment is designated 
by a name of office, or other descriptive appellation, instead of his proper 
name, nor for omitting to state the time at which the offence was com- 
mitted in any case where time is not of the essence of the offence, nor for 
stating the time imperfectly, nor for stating the offence to have been 
committed on a day subsequent to the finding of the indictment, or on an 
impossible day, or on a day that never happened, nor for want of a 
proper or perfect venue, nor for want of a proper or formal conclusion, 
nor for want of or imperfection in the addition of any defendant, nor for 
want of the statement of the value or price of any matter or thing, or the 
amount of damage, injury, or spoil in any case where the value or price, or 
the amount of damage, injury, or spoil, is not of the essence of the offence." 



When available. 165 

It is therefore useless to demur in respect of the defects specified in 
that section, and in respect of other formal defects in an indictment, the 
utility of a special demurrer as a weapon of defence appears to be entirely 
taken away by *. 26 of 14 & 15 Vict. c. 100, which enacts that " every 
objection to any indictment for any formal defect apparent on the face 
thereof shall be taken, by demurrer or motion to quash such indictment, 
before the jury shall be sworn, and not afterwards; and every court 
before which any such objection shall be taken for any formal defect, may, 
if it be thought necessary, cause the indictment to be forthwith amended 
in such particular by some officer of the court or other person, and there- 
upon the trial shall proceed as if no such defect had appeared." See R, v. 
(yCaUaghan, 14 Cox, 499 : R. v. Titley, Id. 502. 

General demurrers.]— Where, however, there is a defect in substance 

apparent on the face of the indictment,, the defendant may still take 

advantage of it by general demurrer, and if he pleads over, instead of 

demurring or moving to quash the indictment (as to which see ante, p. 

120) the defect will in numerous cases be cured by verdict. Thus, by 7 

G. 4, c. 64, s. 21, " where the offence charged has been created by any 

statute or subjected to a greater degree of punishment, or excluded from 

the bonefit of clergy by any statute, the indictment or information shall, 

after verdict, be held sufficient to warrant the punishment prescribed by 

the statute, if it describe the offence in the words of the statute." And, 

independently of that enactment, it is a general rule of pleading at common 

law— in criminal as in civil cases — that, where an averment which is 

necessary for the support of the pleading is imperfectly stated, and the 

verdict on an issue involving that averment is found, if it appears to the 

court after verdict that the verdict could not have been found on this 

issue without proof of this averment, then, after verdict, the defective 

averment, which might have been bad on demurrer, is cured by the 

verdict. Heymann v. R. 9 L. R., 8 Q. B. 102, 105 : R. v. Goldsmith, L. R. 9 

2 C. C. R. 74 ; 42 L. J. (M. C.) 94 : Taylor v. R. [1895] 1 Q. B. 25 ; 64 

L. J. (M. C.) 11 ante, p. 85. In the cases of defects in substance apparent 

on the face of the indictment which do not fall within one of the classes 

mentioned either in 7 G. 4, c. 64, *. 21, or in Heymann v. R. (ubi supra), 

and are therefore not cured by verdict, the defendant may, instead of 

demurring, plead " not guilty ; " and then if convicted, move in arrest oi 

judgment, thus giving himself the same advantage which he could have 

had upon demurrer, after having had a chance of an acquittal on his plea 

of not guilty. The frequent adoption of this course in practice appears 

to be one of the main causes of the infrequency of demurrers in criminal 

practice. Archb. Or. PI. 126 (17th ed.) ; 1 Starkie Cr. PI. 315 (2nd ed.). 

An additional reason for its adoption lies in the fact that the point of law 

raised on his motion can be reserved for the Court for Crown Cases 

Reserved. R. v. Martin, 1 Den, 398 ; 18 L. J. (AT. C.) 187 ; and probably 

since